(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "International law documents : 1943"

I: •- * 

} 1 * 1 ¥ J 

1 [■ ii tit- ■•-■-• •■' '■■••••••'"•■;"' ■•■•■ R 

:1 Hi i t K ri'^4j |? !se M lU * : I Jul %iiJ •'•■ 1' 



I! M m 



J?S«1S*»«*W»1l«*«*»»»3WHM»*H*i 



'•-;': ■ :>3'.:'ii5««.>;-sii«je-i:>:--}'! tt-! 






R" 



NAVAL WAR COLLEGE 

NEWPORT, R. I. 



INTERNATIONAL LAW 
DOCUMENTS 

1943 



$ 



UNITED STATES 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1945 



PREFACE 

The annual publication of the Naval War Col- 
lege on international law for 1943 has been pre- 
pared, as formerly, since 1938, in collaboration 
with Payson Sibley Wild, Jr., Ph. D., professor 
of international law, Harvard University, and 
associate for international law, Naval War Col- 
lege. 

Discussions at the Naval War College have given 
special attention to international law in its rela- 
tion to the conduct of the war now in progress. 
Important and relevant documents concerning 
belligerents and neutrals also have been under 
consideration. Documents cited in this volume 
are among those discussed. 

While certain of these documents are easily ac- 
cessible, others have not yet appeared in any col- 
lection and are not readily available to naval 
officers. 

W. S. Pye, 

Vice Admiral, United States Navy, (Ret.), 

President, Naval War College. 

10 October 1944. 

in 



CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Visit and search 1 

1. A belligerent right 1 

2. Purpose 3 

3. Craft authorized to exercise the right of visit 

and search 4 

4. Craft subject to visit and search 8 

5. Time 14 

6. Place 17 

7. Diversion 18 

II. Destruction of prizes 31 

1. Enemy prizes 31 

2. Neutral prizes 38 

III. War zones 51 

IV. Defense areas \_ 64 

V. Agreement with China regarding jurisdiction over 

criminal offenses by armed forces 68 

VI. Recognition of the French Committee of National 

Liberation 73 

VII. Agreement for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation 

Administration 75 

VIII. Churchill statement on the Azores 87 

IX. Statement by the President of the United States, the 
Prime Minister of Great Britain, and the Premier of 

the Soviet U»ion on Italy's declaration of war 92 

X. Statement by President Roosevelt regarding the puppet 

government in the Philippines 93 

XI. The tripartite conference in Moscow 95 

XII. Conference of President Roosevelt, Generalissimo 
Chiang Kai-shek, and Prime Minister Churchill in 

North Africa 100 

XIII. Conference of President Roosevelt, Prime Minister 

Churchill, and Premier Stalin at Tehran 102 

XIV. Suspension of oil shipments to Spain 105 

XV. United States relations with the existing Argentine 

regime * 106 

XVI. United States objectives in India and the Far East 108 

XVII. Japanese atrocities 109 

XVIII. Granting of plenipotentiary powers in the field of for- 
eign relations to each of the Soviet Socialist Republics 124 

XIX.. Sovereign equality for all nations 127 

XX. Post-war security organization program 129 

XXI. Severance of diplomatic relations with Finland 131 

XXII. The United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. 134 

v 



I. Visit and Search 

1. A Belligerent Right. 

The right of visit and search in time of war, 
recognized in practice and by treaties as early as 
the 15th century was firmly established in the 18th 
and 19th centuries. Visit and search, it was dis- 
covered, was essential for the exercise of the right 
of capture. 

1. "The right of visiting and searching merchant ships 
upon the high seas, whatever be the ships, whatever be the 
cargoes, whatever be the destinations, is an incontestible 
right of the lawfully commissioned cruisers of a belligerent 
nation." 

The Maria, (1799). 1 C. Rob., 340. An English 
case. 

2. "Belligerents have a full and perfect right to capture 
enemy goods and articles going to their enemy which are 
contraband of war. To the exercise of that right the right 
of search is essential. It is a means justified by the end. 
It has been truly denominated a right growing out of, and 
ancillary to the greater right of capture." 

The Nereide, (1815). 9 Cranch., 388. An American 
case. 

3. Article 27. "If the ships of the said subjects, people 
or inhabitants of either of the parties shall be met with, 
either sailing along the coasts or on the high seas, by any 
ship of war of the other, or by any privateers, the said 
ships of war or privateers, for the avoiding of any dis- 
order, shall remain out of cannon-shot, and may send 
their boats aboard the merchant ship which they shall so 
meet with, and may enter her to number of two or three 
men only, to whom the master or commander of such ship 
or vessel shall exhibit his passport concerning the property 
of the ship, made out according to the form inserted in this 
present treaty, and the ship, when she shall have showed 

1 



such passport, shall be free and at liberty to pursue her 
voyage, so as it shall not be lawful to molest or search her 
in any manner, or to give her chase or force her to quit 
her intended course." 

Treaty between the United States and France, 
(1778) Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, Vol, I, 477. 

Similar articles were inserted in many other treaties 
concluded by the United States in the 18th and 19th 
centuries. For example: Conventions, Treaty with 
Sweden, (1783), Art. 12, Malloy, Treaties II, 1729. 
Treaty with Columbia, (1824), Art, 18 ? Mallory ? I, 
297-8. Treaty with Bolivia, (1858), Art. 21, Malloy, 
I, 120. 
4. "12. The belligerent right of search may be exercised 
without previous notice, upon all neutral vessels after the 
beginning of war, to determine their nationality, the char- 
acter of their cargo, and the ports between which they are 
trading." 

Instructions to U. S. Blockading Vessels and 
Cruisers, General Orders, No. 492, (June 20, 1898). 
United States Foreign Relations, 1898, 781. 

Cases and documents of the 20th century merely 
reaffirm this right of visit and search. 

1. "* * * according to the principles universally 
acknowledged, a belligerent war-ship has, as a general 
rule and except under special circumstances, the right to 
stop a neutral commercial vessel in the open sea * * *" 

The Carthage, Scott, Hague Court Reports, (1916), 
330. 

2. "(6) A belligerent warship has, incidental to the 
right of seizure, the right to visit and search all vessels 
on the high seas for the purpose of determining the hostile 
or innocent character of the vessels and their cargoes." 

Memorandum of the Secretary of State, (April 27, 
1916). United States Foreign Relations, 1916, Supp., 
247. 

3. "42. The belligerent right of visit and search, subject 
to exemptions mentioned in Section VII, may be exercised 
outside of neutral jurisdiction upon private vessels after 
the beginning of war in order to determine their national- 



3 

ity, the port of destination and departure, the character of 
their cargo, the nature of their employment, or other facts 
which bear on their relation to the war." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 21. 

4. "Commanders of all Naval vessels shall whenever pos- 
sible take necessary steps to assure themselves of the 
character of all vessels sighted on the high seas in accord- 
ance with international law and usage." 

Alnav No. 78, (May 21, 1918). United States For- 
eign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, Vol. II, 1934. 

5. Article 1. "1. Warships of the belligerents have the 
right to stop and visit on the high seas and in territorial 
waters that are not neutral any merchant ship * * *" 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the 
United States and other American Republics, (1928). 
United States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2. 

6. "Any seaplane met at sea by a vessel of war may be 
visited and searched to determine its relation to the hostili- 
ties and it may be treated according to the evidence 
formed." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1935, 89. 

7. "It is agreed in principle that belligerent airplanes 
have the right to visit and search not only neutral surface 
vessels but also neutral aircraft." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1938, 15-16. 

8. Article 49. "(1) A belligerent has the right of visit 
and search on and over the high seas and on and over 
territorial waters that are not neutral." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 American Journal of International Law, 
(1939), Supp. 184. 

2. Purpose. 

Visit and search is necessary in order to deter- 
mine whether or not a ship is liable to capture 
under international law. 



1_ "12. rjy^Q belligerent right of search may be exercised 
without previous notice, upon all neutral vessels after the 
beginning of war, to determine their nationality, the char- 
acter of their cargo, and the ports between which they are 
trading." 

Instructions to U. S. Blockading Vessels and 
Cruisers, General Orders, No. 492, (June 20, 1898). 
United /States Foreign Relations, 1898, 781. 

2. "A belligerent warship has incidental to the right of 
seizure, the right to visit and search all vessels on the high 
seas for the purpose of determining the hostile or innocent 
character of the vessels and their cargoes." 

Memorandum of the Secretary of State, (April 27, 

1916) . United States Foreign Relations, 1916, Supp., 247. 

3 # "42 * * * to determine their nationality, the 

character of their cargo, the nature of their employment, 

or other facts which bear on their relation to the war." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 21. 
4. "* * * with the object of ascertaining its (the 
ship's) character and nationality and of verifying whether 
it conveys cargo prohibited by international law or has 
committed any violation of blockade." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the 
United States of America and Other American Re- 
publics, (1928). United States Treaty Series, No. 845, 
2-3. 

3. Craft authorized to exercise the right of visit 
and search. 

Before the first World War, only commissioned 
warships exercised the right of visit and search. 

1. See Article 27 of the Treaty between the United States 
and France, (1778). Above, under A Belligerent Right. 

2. "The right of visiting and searching * * * is an 
incontestible right of the lawfully commissioned cruisers of 
a belligerent nation." 

The Maria, (1799) . 1 C. Rob., 340. 



3. Article 1. "Privateering is and remains abolished ;" 
Declaration of Paris, (1856), (translation). "La 
course est et demeure abolie ;" British and Foreign State 
Papers, Vol. 46, (1855-1856), 26. 

Since the beginning of the first World War, the 
right of submarines and airplanes, as well as war- 
ships, to exercise the right of visit and search has 
been recognized. 

1. "according to the principles universally acknowledged, 
a belligerent war-ship has * * * the right to stop a 
neutral commercial vessel in the open sea." 

The Carthage. Scott, Hague Court Reports, (1916), 
330. 

2. "(6) A belligerent warship has, incidental to the right 
of seizure, the right to visit and search all vessels on the high 
seas * * *." 

Memorandum of the Secretary of State, (April 27, 
1916). United States Foreign Relations 1916, Supp., 
247. 

3. "Submarines have the right to order the ship's papers 
of any vessel held up to be brought alongside in a boat." 

Revised German Prize Code, 1916. United States 
Naval War College, International Law Documents, 
1925, 118. 

4. Article 1. "(1) A merchant vessel must be ordered to 
submit to visit and search to determine its character before 
it can be seized. 

"A merchant vessel must not be attacked unless it refuses 
to submit to visit and search after warning, or to proceed as 
directed after seizure. 

"A merchant vessel must not be destroyed unless the crew 
and passengers have been first placed in safety. 

"(2) Belligerent submarines are not under any circum- 
stances exempt from the universal rules ab<^e stated ; and if 
a submarine cannot capture a merchant vessel in conformity 
with these rules the existing law of notions requires it to de- 
sist from attack and to permit the merchant vessel to proceed 
unmolested." 



6 

Article 3. "The Signatory Powers, desiring to insure the 
enforcement of the humane rules of existing law declared by 
them with respect to attacks upon and the seizure and de- 
struction of merchant ships, further declare that any person 
in the service of any Power who shall violate any of those 
rules, whether or not such person is under orders of a gov- 
ernmental superior, shall be deemed to have violated the 
laws of war and shall be liable to trial and punishment as if 
for an act of piracy and may be brought to trial before the 
civil or military authorities of any Power within the jurisdic- 
tion of which he may be found. 

Article 4. "The Signatory Powers recognize the practical 
impossibility of using submarines as commerce destroyers 
without violating, as they were violated in the recent war of 
1914-1918, the requirements universally accepted by civilized 
nations for the protection of the lives of neutrals and non- 
combatants, and to the end that the prohibition of the use of 
submarines as commerce destroyers shall be universally ac- 
cepted as a part of the law of nations they now accept that 
prohibition as henceforth binding as between themselves and 
they invite all other nations to adhere thereto." 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922) . Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. Z., 
(1922), Supp., 58. 

5. Article 49. "Private aircraft are liable to visit and 
search and to capture by belligerent military aircraft." 

Article 50. "Belligerent military aircraft have the right 
to order public non-military and private aircraft to alight 
in or proceed for visit and search to a suitable locality 
reasonably accessible. 

"Refusal, after warning, to obey such orders to alight or 
to proceed to such a locality for examination exposes an 
aircraft to the risk of being fired upon." 

General Report of the Commission of Jurists at the 
Hague, (19M) : 17 A. J. I. L., (1923), Supp., 257. 

6. Article 1. "The following rules shall govern commerce 
in time of war : 

"1. Warships of the belligerents have the right to stop and 
visit on the high seas and in territorial waters that are not 



neutral any merchant ship with the object of ascertaining its 
character and nationality and of verifying whether it con- 
veys cargo prohibited by international law or has committed 
any violation of blockade. If the merchant ship does not 
heed the signal to stop, it may be pursued by the warship and 
stopped by force ; outside of such a case the ship cannot be 
attacked unless, after being hailed, it fails to observe the in- 
structions given it. 

"The ship shall not be rendered incapable of navigation 
before the crew and passengers have been placed in safety. 

"2. Belligerent submarines are subject to the foregoing 
rules." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the 
United States and Other American Republics, (1928). 
United States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2-3. 

7. Article 22. "The following are accepted as established 
rules of International Law : 

"(1) In their action with regard to merchant ships, sub- 
marines must conform to the rules of International Law to 
which surface vessels are subject." 

Treaty between the United States and Other Powers 
for Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament, 
(1930). United States Treaty Series, No. 830, 27. 

Also the pro ces -verbal, (1936). 173 League of Na- 
tions Treaty Series, 353. 
The rules stated in this Treaty of London (1930) and 
in the proces-verbal of 1936 were invoked by the Inter- 
national Agreement for Collective Measures against Pirati- 
cal Attacks in the Mediterranean by Submarines signed at 
Nyon on Sept. 14, 1937. The same rules were applied to air- 
craft through Article II of the Supplementary Agreement 
to the Nyon Arrangement. 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1938, 100-103. 

8. Article 49. "(2) A belligerent may exercise the right 
of visit and search only by a commissioned warship or com- 
missioned military aircraft. Belligerent armed merchant 
vessels or armed nonmilitary aircraft may not exercise the 
right of visit and search." 



8 

Article 54. "(2) A submarine or aircraft which does not 
carry a small boat may direct a visited vessel to send its boat 
to the submarine or aircraft with an officer carrying the 
ship's papers." 

Article 109. "(2) If sea conditions permit the aircraft to 
alight, the aircraft shall alight and the procedure applicable 
to surface vessels shall be followed. 

"(3) If the belligerent aircraft is unable to alight, it may 
require the vessel to proceed on its course under instructions 
as to speed until the sea moderates or until a naval vessel of 
the belligerent appears. If visit and search are not effected 
by either means within six hours, or if the aircraft does not 
remain within sight or hearing of the merchant vessel, the 
vessel may resume its course at normal speed." 

Article 111. "(1) Uncertified neutral private aircraft are 
subject to visit and search by belligerent commissioned mili- 
tary aircraft. 

"(2) Such belligerent aircraft may order such neutral 
aircraft to alight for visit and search in a locality reason- 
ably safe and accessible. 

"(3) Refusal, after warning, to obey such orders to alight 
or to proceed to such a locality for examination, exposes an 
aircraft to the risk of being fired upon." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 184-5, 185-6, 
197. 

4. Craft subject to visit and search. 

Before the development of the airplane, visit and 
search could only be exercised upon enemy and 
neutral merchant ships. 

1. "The right of visiting and searching merchant ships 
upon the high seas, whatever be the ships, whatever be the 
cargoes, whatever be the destination^, is an incontestable 
right of the lawfully commissioned cruisers of a belligerent 
nation." 

The Maria, (1799) . 1 C. Kob., 340. 

1. Enemy hospital ships may also be visited and searched. 



9 

Article 4. "The belligerents shall have the right to con- 
trol and search them (hospital ships) ; they can refuse to 
help them, order them off, make them take a certain course, 
and put a Commissioner on board; they can even detain 
them, if important circumstances require it." 

Ill Hague Convention, (1899). Malloy, II, 2038 X 
Hague Convention, (1907). Malloy, II, 2333-4. 
2 u * * * according to the principles universally ac- 
knowledge, a belligerent warship has, as a general rule 
and except under special circumstances, the right to stop a 
neutral commercial vessel in the open sea * * *." 

The Carthage. Scott, Hague Court Reports, (1916), 
330. 
3. Article 1. "(1) A merchant vessel must be ordered to 
submit to visit and search to determine its character before 
it can be seized." 

Treaty concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922). Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. Z., 
(1922), Supp., 58. 

With the development of the airplane visit and 
search not only was exercised over enemy and neu- 
tral merchant ships but the right was extended 
also to enemy and neutral non-military airplanes. 

1. Article 1. "A merchant vessel must be ordered to sub- 
mit to visit and search to determine its character before it 
can be seized." 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922) . Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. L., 
(1922),.Supp.,58. 

2. Article 49. "Private aircraft are liable to visit and 
search and to capture by belligerent military aircraft." 

General Report of the Commission of Jurists at the 
Hague, (1923). IT A. J.'I. Z., (1923), JSupp., 257. 

3. Article 1. "1. Warships of the belligerents have the 
right to stop and visit on the high seas and in territorial 
waters that are not neutral any merchant ship * * *." 



10 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between United 
States and Other American Republics, (1928). United 
States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2. 

4. Article 52. "Neutral non-military aircraft, while upon 
the surface of the water, shall, for purposes of visit and 
search, be treated as surface vessels." 

Article 111. "(1) Uncertified neutral private aircraft are 
subject to visit and search by belligerent commissioned 
military aircraft." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 185, 197. 

5. "On October 9th, 1939, the American merchant steamer 
City of Flint was visited and searched by a German cruiser 
at an estimated distance of 1,250 miles from New York." 

"The original visit and search and seizure of the Flint 
by the German warship, the placing of the prize crew on 
board, and the conduct of that crew were apparently all 
in accord with law." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1939, 24, 25. 

Forcible measures may be taken to overcome re- 
sistance by armed merchant vessels to visit and 
search. Enemy armed merchant ships may be 
sunk on sight. 

1. Article 63. "Forcible resistance to the legitimate exer- 
cise of the right of stoppage, search, and capture, involves 
in all cases the condemnation of the vessel. The cargo is 
liable to the same treatment as the cargo of an enemy 
vessel." 

Declaration of London, (1909). British Parliamen- 
tary Papers, Misc. No. 4, (1909), (Cd. 4554), 89. 

2. "2. If an armed enemy merchant vessel offers armed 
resistance against measures taken under the law of prize, 
such resistance is to be overcome with all means available. 
The enemy government bears all responsibility for any 
damages to the vessel, cargo, and passengers." 



11 

Schedule to Prize Code (German), 1914. Huberich 
and King, The Prize *Code of the German Empire, 
(New York, 1915), 75. 

3. "45. If the summoned vessel resists or takes to flight 
she may be pursued and brought to, by forcible measures, if 
necessary." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June 1917), 21. 

4. Article 1. "A merchant vessel must not be attacked un- 
less it refuses to submit to visit and search after warning, 
or to proceed as directed after seizure." 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, 1922). Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. L. y 
(1922), Supp., 58. 

5. Article 22. "The following are accepted as established 
rules of International law : 

(1) In their action with regard to merchant ships, sub- 
marines must conform to the rules of International Law to 
which surface vessels are subject. 

(2) In particular, except in the case of persistent refusal 
to stop on being duly summoned, or of active resistance to 
visit and search, a warship whether surface vessel or sub- 
marine, may not sink or render incapable of navigation a 
merchant vessel without having first placed passengers, crew 
and ship's papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the 
ship's boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the 
safety of the passengers and crew is assured, in the existing 
sea and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or 
the presence of another vessel which is in a position to take 
them on board." 

Treaty between the United States and Other Powers 
for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Arma- 
ment (1930). United States Treaty Series, No. 830, 27. 
Also the proces-verbal (1936), 173 League of Nations 
Treaty Series, 353. 

6. "The United States regarded resistance or flight as 
ground for using force sufficient to cause the merchant ves- 
sel to lie to . . . but not a ground for sinking the vessel. 

615960°— 45 2 



12 

Of course the . . . vessel might be sunk in the exercise of 
the right, but the use of force was held to be restricted to 
that necessary to bring the vessel to, and forcible resistance 
by the merchant vessel was not in itself a ground for sink- 
ing (it) but a just ground for its condemnation," 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1938, 50. 

7. Article 53. "(2) If the vessel when summoned does not 
stop, attempts to escape, or resists visit and search, it may be 
compelled to stop by force and the belligerent shall not be 
responsible for resulting injury to life or property." 

Article 54. "(3) In particular, except in the case of per- 
sistent refusal to stop on being duly summoned, or of active 
resistance to visit or search, a warship, whether surface or 
submarine, or a military aircraft, may not sink or render 
incapable of navigation an unarmed merchant vessel with- 
out having first placed passengers, crew and ship's papers 
in a place of safety. For this purpose the ship's boats are 
not regarded as a place of safety unless the safety of the 
passengers and crew is assured, in the existing sea and 
weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or by the 
presence of another vessel which is in a position to take 
them on board." 

Article 55. "In their action with regard to enemy armed 
merchant vessels, belligerent warships, whether surface or 
submarine, and belligerent military aircraft are governed 
by the rules applicable to their action with regard to enemy 
warships." 

Article 109. "(1) A belligerent commissioned military 
aircraft *may signal a vessel to stop as by radio, or by firing 
a machine gun burst across its bows." 

"(4) If the vessel when summoned does not stop, at- 
tempts to escape, resists visit and search, or does not pro- 
ceed according to instruction, it may be compelled by force 
to stop and the belligerent shall not be responsible for 
resulting injury to life or property." 

Article III. "(1) Uncertified neutral private aircraft 
are subject to visit and search by belligerent commissioned 
military aircraft. 



13 

"(2) Such belligerent aircraft may order such neutral air- 
craft to alight for visit and search in a locality reasonably 
safe and accessible. 

"(3) Refusal, after warning, to obey such orders to alight 
or to proceed to such a locality for examination, exposes 
an aircraft to the risk of being fired upon." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School), 33 A. J. I. Z., (1939), Supp., 185, 186, 197. 

Neutral vessels under convoy of vessels of war 
of their own nationality cannot be visited and 
searched. 

1. "Article 61. Neutral vessels under national convoy are 
exempt from search. The commander of a convoy gives, 
in writing, at the request of the commander of a belligerent 
warship, all information as to the character of the vessels 
and their cargoes, which could be obtained and their car- 
goes, which could be obtained by search." 

Declaration of London, 1909. Not ratified. British 
Parliamentary Papers, Misc. No. 4, (1909) (Cd. 
4554) , 89. 

2. "51. Neutral vessels under convoy of vessels of war of 
their own nationality are exempt from search. The com- 
mander of the convoy gives orally or in writing, at the 
request of the commander of a belligerent ship of war, all 
information regarding the vessels and their cargoes which 
could be obtained by visit and search. 

"52. If the commander of the United States vessel has 
reason to suspect that the commander of the convoy has 
been deceived regarding the innocent character of any of 
the vessels (and their cargoes or voyages) under his con- 
voy, the former officer shall impart his suspicions to the 
latter. In such a case it is to be expected that the com- 
mander of the convoy will undertake an examination to 
establish the facts. The commander of the convoy alone 
can conduct this investigation, the officers of the United 
States visiting vessel can take no part therein." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 23. 



14 

3. Article 56. "A belligerent warship may not visit and 
search vessels under neutral convoy. The commander of a 
convoy shall, upon request of the commander of a bel- 
ligerent warship, give, by radio or otherwise, all informa- 
tion as to the character of the vessels and their cargoes 
which could be obtained by visit and search." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and, Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School), 33 A. J. L L., (1939), Mpp. 9 186. 

4. Article 34. "(1.) Neutral vessels under convoy of their 
own warships are not liable to visit and search. 

"(2) The commander of the convoy may, however, be 

requested to give information and assurances regarding 

the character of the vessels in his charge and their cargoes." 

German Prize Law Code, (1939). Hackworth, G. 

H., Digest of International Law, (Washington, 1943), 

Vol. VII, 212. 

5. Time. 

Visit and search may be exercised only after the 
beginning of war. 

1. "This right (of visit and search) is strictly a bel- 
ligerent right allowed by the general consent of nations 
in time of war, and limited to those occasions." 

The Marianna Flora, (1826), Wheat., 42. 

2. "The belligerent right of search may be exercised with- 
out previous notice, upon all neutral vessels after the 
beginning of war . * * *. 

Instructions to U. S. Blockading Vessels and 
Cruisers, General Orders, No. 492, (June 20, 1898). 
United States Foreign Relations, 1898, 781. 

3. "42. The belligerent right of visit and search 
* * * may be exercised * * * after the beginning 
of war * * *." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 21. 

All unarmed neutral and enemy sea and air craft 
must first be called upon to stop and submit to 



15 

visit and search before force may be used for 
their capture or destruction. 

1. In the cases of the destruction of the neutral American 
vessels, the Gulflight and the Nebraskan, by submarine and 
without warning, Germany admitted liability, claiming 
that the action was the result of a mistake. 

United States Foreign Relations, 1915, 439, 468. 

1. In the past, there has been a qualified right of visit 
and search in time of peace in the case of vessels suspected 
of offenses of piracy or violations of slave trade, prohibi- 
tion, fisheries, or pelagic sealing treaties, With the ex- 
ception of action taken under the provisions, of special 
conventions in regard to fisheries, visit and search in modern 
times has not been customary in time of peace. 

1. The Marianna Flora, (1826), 11 Wheat. 1. 

2. The Antelope, (1825), 10 Wheat. 66. 

3. Art. 2, Convention between the United States and 
Chile for the Prevention of Smuggling of Intoxicating 
Liquors, (1930). United States Treaty Series, No. 
829, 2. Many similar treaties were signed between 
1924 and 1933. 

4. Fur Seal Convention, (1911), 37 Stat. 1538. 
Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, III, 2629. 

2. "45. If the summoned vessel resists or takes to flight 
she may be pursued and brought to, by forcible measures, 
if necessary." 

"97. In no case after a vessel has been brought to may it 
be destroyed until after a visit and search has been made 
and all persons on board have been placed in safety, and 
also, if practicable, their personal effects." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
verning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917) , 21, 35. 

3. Article 1. "(1) A merchant vessel must be ordered to 
submit to visit and search to determine its character before 
it can be seized. 

"A merchant vessel must not be attacked unless it refuses 
to submit to visit and search after warning, or to proceed 
as directed after capture." 



16 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922). Not ratified. 16 A. J. 
I. Z., (1922), Supp., 5.8. 

4. Article 1. "If the merchant ship does not heed the 
signal to stop it may be pursued by the warship and 
stopped by force ; outside of such a case the ship cannot be 
attacked unless, after being hailed, it fails to observe the 
instructions given it." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between United 
States and Other American Republics, (1928). United 
States Treaty Series, No. 845, 3. 

5. Article 109. "If the vessel when summoned does not 
stop, attempts to escape, resists visit and search, or does not 
proceed according to instructions, it may be compelled by 
force to stop and the belligerent shall not be responsible 
for resulting injury to life and property." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral /States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School) . 33 A. J. I. Z., (1939) , Supp., 197. 

6. "I am under the necessity of bringing to the attention 
of Congress the ruthless sinking by a German submarine 
on May 21 of an American ship, the Robin Moor, in the 
south Atlantic Ocean * * * while the vessel was on 
the high seas en route to South Africa. 

"According to the formal depositions of survivors the 
vessel was sunk within 30 minutes from the time of the 
first warning given by the commander of the submarine to 
an officer of the Robin MoorP 

"It was sunk despite the fact that its American national- 
ity was admittedly known to the Commander of the sub- 
marine and that its nationality was likewise clearly in- 
dicated by the flag and other markings." 

Message from President Roosevelt to Congress, June 
20, 1941. 

United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1940, 237. 

7. In 1941 a German submarine torpedoed and shelled 
without warning the S. S. Sessa, an American ship under 
Panamanian registry, and a German aircraft sank without 



17 

warning The Steelfarer, an American vessel. President 
Roosevelt denounced this German practice of sinking with- 
out warning as being in contravention to International 
Law. 

Address by the President, Sept. 11, 1941. United 
States Naval War College, International Law Docu- 
ments, 1941, 15-16. 

6. Place. 

Visit and search can be exercised only on waters 
and in air outside of neutral jurisdiction. 

1. "The right of visiting and searching merchant ships 
upon the high seas, whatever be the ships, whatever be the 
cargoes, whatever be the destinations, is an incontestable 
right of the lawfully commissioned cruisers of a belligerent 
nation." 

The Maria, (1799) . 1 C. Kob., 340. 

2. Article 2. "Any act of hostility, including capture and 
the exercise of the right of search, committed by belliger- 
ent war-ships in the territorial waters of a neutral Power, 
constitutes a violation of neutrality and is strictly for- 
bidden." 

XIII Hague Convention (1907). Malloy, Treaties, 
Conventions, Vol. II, 2359. 

3. "* * * according to the principles universally 
acknowledged, a belligerent war-ship has, as a general rule 
and except under special circumstances, the right to stop a 
neutral commercial vessel in the open sea * * *." 

The Carthage, Scott, Hague Court Reports, (1916), 
330. 

4. "(6) A belligerent warship has, incidental to the right 
of seizure, the right to visit and search all vessels on the 
high seas for the purpose of determining the hostile or in- 
nocent character of the vessels and their cargoes." 

Memorandum of the Secretary of State, (April 24, 
1916) , United States Foreign Relations, 1916, 247. 

5. "12. All acts of hostility, including capture and the 
exercise of the right of visit and search, committed by bel- 
ligerent ships of war in the territorial waters of a neutral 



16 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922). Not ratified. 16 A. J. 
I. L., (1922), Supp., 5.8. 

4. Article 1. "If the merchant ship does not heed the 
signal to stop it may be pursued by the warship and 
stopped by force ; outside of such a case the ship cannot be 
attacked unless, after being hailed, it fails to observe the 
instructions given it." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between United 
States and Other American Republics, (1928). United 
States Treaty Series, No. 845, 3. 

5. Article 109. "If the vessel when summoned does not 
stop, attempts to escape, resists visit and search, or does not 
proceed according to instructions, it may be compelled by 
force to stop and the belligerent shall not be responsible 
for resulting injury to life and property." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School) . 33 A. J. I. L., (1939) , Supp., 197. 

6. "I am under the necessity of bringing to the attention 
of Congress the ruthless sinking by a German submarine 
on May 21 of an American ship, the Robin Moor, in the 
south Atlantic Ocean * * * while the vessel was on 
the high seas en route to South Africa. 

"According to the formal depositions of survivors the 
vessel was sunk within 30 minutes from the time of the 
first warning given by the commander of the submarine to 
an officer of the Robin MoorP 

"It was sunk despite the fact that its American national- 
ity was admittedly known to the Commander of the sub- 
marine and that its nationality was likewise clearly in- 
dicated by the flag and other markings." 

Message from President Roosevelt to Congress, June 
20, 1941. 

United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1940, 237. 

7. In 1941 a German submarine torpedoed and shelled 
without warning the S. S. Sessa, an American ship under 
Panamanian registry, and a German aircraft sank without 



17 

warning The Steelfarer, an American vessel. President 
Roosevelt denounced this German practice of sinking with- 
out warning as being in contravention to International 
Law. 

Address by the President, Sept. 11, 1941. United 
States Naval War College, International Law Docu- 
ments, 1941, 15-16. 

6. Place, 

Visit and search can be exercised only on waters 
and in air outside of neutral jurisdiction. 

1. "The right of visiting and searching merchant ships 
upon the high seas, whatever be the ships, whatever be the 
cargoes, whatever be the destinations, is an incontestable 
right of the lawfully commissioned cruisers of a belligerent 
nation." 

The Maria, (1799) . 1 C. Rob., 340. 

2. Article 2. "Any act of hostility, including capture and 
the exercise of the right of search, committed by belliger- 
ent war-ships in the territorial waters of a neutral Power, 
constitutes a violation of neutrality and is strictly for- 
bidden." 

XIII Hague Convention (1907). Malloy, Treaties, 
Conventions, Vol. II, 2359. 

3. "* * * according to the principles universally 
acknowledged, a belligerent war-ship has, as a general rule 
and except under special circumstances, the right to stop a 
neutral commercial vessel in the open sea * * *." 

The Carthage, Scott, Hague Court Reports, (1916), 
330. 

4. "(6) A belligerent warship has, incidental to the right 
of seizure, the right to visit and search all vessels on the 
high seas for the purpose of determining the hostile or in- 
nocent character of the vessels and their cargoes." 

Memorandum of the Secretary of State, (April 24, 
1916), United States Foreign Relations, 1916, 247. 

5. "12. All acts of hostility, including capture and the 
exercise of the right of visit and search, committed by bel- 
ligerent ships of war in the territorial waters of a neutral 



18 

power, constitute a violation of neutrality and are strictly 
forbidden." 

. Instructions for the Navy of the United States 

(June, 1917), 13. 

6. "42. The belligerent right of visit and search may be 
exercised outside of neutral jurisdiction * * *." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
verning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917) , 21. 

7. "Commanders of all Naval vessels shall whenever pos- 
sible take necessary steps to assure themselves of the char- 
acter of all vessels sighted on the high seas in accordance 
with international law and usage." 

Alnva No. 78, May 21, 1918. 1918 Foreign Rela- 
tions, Supp. 1, Vol. II, 934. 

8. Article 1. Warships of the belligerents have the right 
to stop and visit on the high seas and in territorial waters 
that are not neutral any merchant ship * * *." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the United 
States and Other American Kepublics, (1928) United 
States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2. 

9. Article 49. "(1) A belligerent has the right of visit 
and search on and over the high seas and on and over ter- 
ritorial waters that are not neutral." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. L., (1939)., Supp., 184. 

7. Diversion. 

Prior to the World War, visit and search was ex- 
ercised "sur place' 7 ; diversion for search or visit 
and search, although not expressly prohibited, was 
uncommon. 

1. "Thirdly another right accrued, that of bringing in for 
a more deliberate inquiry than could possibly be conducted 
at sea upon such a number of vessels, even those whicli 
professed to carry cargoes with a neutral destina- 
tion * * *." 

The Maria, (1799) , C. Rob., 340. 

2. Article 196. "In exercising the right of visit, the Com- 
mander should be careful to occasion to the vessel no delay 



19 

or deviation from her course that can be avoided, and gen- 
erally to conduct the visit in a manner as little vexatious as 
possible." 

British Manuel of Prize Law. (1888). Draft Con- 
vention on the Rights and Duties of Neutral States in 
Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law School). 33 
A. J. I. Z., (1939), Supp., Comment, 583. 

3. "81. In the case of the stoppage and search of a vessel 
under a neutral flag, the commander must endeavor to avoid 
bringing the vessel out of the course of her voyage." 

"85. If by reason of the weather conditions it is not pos- 
sible to send out a boat, the commander may, in case there 
is grave suspicion, order the vessel to follow a prescribed 
course, and follow with the war vessel, until it is possible to 
carry out the search." 

"91. Where it appears that a search is necessary, but the 
same cannot be accomplished at the time, the vessel is to be 
searched at a subsequent time at a suitable place. If by 
reason of this fact the vessel is subjected to substantial 
losses, the commander shall proceed to a provisional 
capture." 

German Prize Ordnance of 1909, as in force July l r 
1915. Huberich and King, The Prize Code of the Ger- 
man Empire, New^ York, (1915), 50, 51-2, and 54. 

4. "In regard to search at sea, an examination of the in- 
structions issued to naval commanders of the United States, 
Great Britain, Russia, Japan, Spain, Germany, and France 
from 1888 to'the beginning of the war shows that search in 
port was not contemplated by the Government of any of 
these countries. On the contrary, the context of the respec- 
tive instructions shows that search at sea was the proce- 
dure expected to be followed by the commanders. All of 
these instructions impress upon the naval officers the neces- 
sity of acting with tne utmost moderation — and in some 
cases commanders are specifically instructed — in exercising 
the right of visit and search, to avoid undue deviation of the 
vessel from her course." 

Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Brit- 
ain, Oct. 21, 1915. United States Foreign Relations, 
1915, Supp., 579. 



20 

In the World War, most of the belligerents prac- 
ticed deviation for search, claiming that searching 
modern vessels under modern conditions of war- 
fare was too difficult or dangerous to undertake 
upon the high seas. 

1. "If vessels carrying such cargoes for Swedish ports 
will call at a British port, such as Falmouth, Lough Swilly, 
or Kirkwall, on their way, notice will be sent to the fleet 
which will prevent their being searched or stopped at sea, 
provided of course they do not commit any unneutral act. 

"In fact, if all vessels for Scandinavian ports will call at a 
British port on their way, it will avoid the delay and in- 
convenience of being stopped at sea." 

British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the 
British Minister at Stockholm, Oct. 14, 1914. United 
States Foreign Relations, 1914, Supp., p. 323. 

2. "9. Suspect ships are to be searched, and, according to 
the result of the search, either released, brought into port, or 
captured. Since, however, for military reasons or because 
of the nature of the cargo, search can seldom be carried out 
at sea, it is advisable for suspect ships at once to be brought 
into a German port in order to undergo a more thorough 
search. In such cases a ship shall only be declared captured 
if during her voyage to a German port it is necessary to take 
her through neutral territorial waters." 

Revised German Prize Ordnance (1916). United 
States Naval War College, International Law Docu- 
ments, 1925, 32. 

3. "It is reported that the Wolf, a German armed steamer 
operating in the Pacific in 1916-1917 as a commerce raider, 
had a plane attached to it, the Wolfchen, which located ves- 
sels and diverted them to the mother ship. Thus, on May 
27, 1917, while the Wolf was making repairs near an unin- 
habited island, the Wolfchen was sent out to bring in a ves- 
sel which had been sighted, and dropped orders on the deck 
of the vessel, the Wairuna of New Zealand, which was 
brought to anchor near the Wolf? 



21 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp. 587. 

4. "The French frequently practiced diversion for search. 
Thus, in The Federieo, a Spanish vessel was met by a 
French destroyer, and since visit could not take place at 
once because of the condition of the sea, conducted to Toulon 
and there visited and searched." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School) Comment 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 587. 

5. "* * * it would be impossible under the conditions of 
modern warfare to confine the rights of visit and search to 
an examination of the ship at the place where she is en- 
countered without surrendering a fundamental belligerent 
right." 

Quoting Admiral Sir John Jellicoe's report, 
" 'It is undoubtedly the case that the size of modern 
vessels is one of the factors which renders search at sea far 
more difficult than in the days of smaller vessels. 

" 'There are other facts, however, which render it neces- 
sary to bring vessels into port for search. The most im- 
portant is the manner in which those in command of Ger- 
man submarines, in entire disregard of international law 
and of their own prize regulations, attack and sink mer- 
chant vessels on the high seas, neutral as well as British, 
without visiting the ship and therefore without any exami- 
nation of the cargo. This procedure renders it unsafe for 
a neutral vessel which is being examined by officers from 
a British ship to remain stopped on the high seas, and it is 
therefore in the interests of the neutrals themselves that the 
examination should be conducted in port.' " 

A memorandum from Sir Edward Grey given by the 
British Ambassador to the United States Secretary of 
State, April 24, 1916. United States Foreign Relations^ 
1916, Supp., 369, 370. 

6. "A vessel which is encountered at sea on her way to 
or from a port in any neutral country afforded means of 
access to the enemy territory without calling at a port in 
British or Allied territory shall until the contrary is estab- 



22 

lished be deemed to be carrying goods with an enemy desti- 
nation or of enemy origin and shall be brought in for 
examination and if necessary for adjudication before the 
prize court. 

"2. Any vessel carrying goods with an enemy destination 
or of enemy origin shall be liable to capture and condemna- 
tion in respect of the carriage of such goods provided that 
in the case of any vessel which calls at an appointed British 
or Allied port for the examination of her cargo no sen- 
tence of condemnation shall be pronounced in respect only 
of the carriage of goods of enemy origin or destination and 
no such presumption as is laid down in Article J shall arise. 

"3. Goods which are found on the examination of any 
vessel to be goods of enemy origin or of enemy destination 
shall be liable to condemnation." 

British Order in Council of 1915 as modified by 
proclamation, Feb. 16, 1917. United States Foreign 
Relations, 1917, JSupp. 1, p. 493. 

The United States, as well as other neutral coun- 
tries, protested against this belligerent practice. 

1. "The United States Government feels obliged to re- 
quest that the method of detention followed in these in- 
stances for the purpose of procuring guaranties or further 
evidence should be discontinued, and that the visit and 
search of vessels be made at sea with the greatest expedition 
possible under the circumstances." 

Acting Secretary of State to the British Ambassador, 
Nov. 7, 1914. United States Foreign Relations, 1914, 
Supp., 340. 

2. "The Government of the United States readily admits 
the full right to visit and search on the high seas the vessels 
of American citizens or other neutral vessels carrying Ameri- 
can goods and to detain them when there is sufficient evi- 
dence to justify a belief that contraband articles are in their 
cargoes; but His Majesty's Government, judging by their 
own experience in the past, must realize that this Govern- 
ment cannot without protest permit American ships or 
American cargoes to be taken into British ports and their 
detained for the purpose of searching generally for evidence 



23 

of contraband, or upon presumption created by special mu- 
nicipal enactments which are clearly at variance with inter- 
national law and practice." 

Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain, 

Dec. 26, 1914. United States Foreign Relations, 1914, 

Supp., 374-5. 
3. "While admitting established right of visit and search 
and reasonable liberality in its exercise, the United States 
cannot yield to the seizure of American ships or American- 
owned cargo in neutral ships on the high seas to be taken to 
belligerent ships for examination in search of evidence of 
contraband, where the captor is not in possession of evidential 
facts creating a legal presumption or just suspicion that 
the ship is engaged in illegitimate trade, or that contrabrand 
cargo is aboard. If report of consular agent Swinemunde is 
correct you will make known these views to German Gov- 
ernment and advise consuls and consular agents accord- 
ingly." 

Secretary of State to Ambassador in Germany, Aug. 

IT, 1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1915, Supp. 

515. 

After the United States became a belligerent in 
the World War, American agreements like the 
British were made with the neutrals for " volun- 
tary " calls at Allied ports by neutral vessels for 
search. 

1. "Replying to your request for information as to the 
nature of the participation of American naval officers in 
the British practice with respect to the searching and rout- 
ing of neutral vessels, I have to state that American naval 
forces in European waters have been engaged largely in 
anti-submarine operations and in escorting convoys. The 
belligerent right of visit and search has been exercised on 
the high seas everywhere in accordance with Instructions for 
the Navy of the United States Governing Maritime War- 
fare, June, 1917, except that boarding vessels are not re- 
quired to make entries in ships' logs where such entries 
would give information facilitating unlawful attack by 



24 

enemy submarines. Mandatory routing of neutral merchant 
vessels has not been practiced by our Navy." 

Secretary of Navy to Secretary of State, July 5, 

1918. United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, 

vol. II, 924-5. 

2. "* * * there is no record in the Navy Department of 
any case of search and seizure by the vessels of the United 
States Navy of the. kind contested in the American note of 
October 1, 1915, found in Foreign Relations, 1915, Supple- 
ment, 578-589 (in regard to diversion for search) ." 

Secretary of Navy to the Secretary of State. United 
States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, vol. II, 934. 

3. "V. No application for 'bunkers' (stores, supplies, and 
bunker fuel) by any neutral ship shall be approved unless 
the person or persons owning, managing, chartering, or con- 
trolling such vessel shall enter into an agreement in a form 
to be approved by the War Trade Board, agreeing to comply 
with and be bound by each and all of the following regula- 
tions. Failure to comply with any of these regulations in 
the case of any one vessel may involve the refusal of 'bunk- 
ers' to all of the vessels of the particular person, firm, or cor- 
poration managing, owning, chartering, or controlling the 
vessel in question." 

"(e) Every vessel which proceeds from or to the United 
States, to or from Norway, Sweden, Denmark (including 
Iceland and the Faroe Islands), Holland, Spain, or to or 
from any neutral port in the Mediterranean Sea, shall call for 
examination as may be directed by the War Trade Board." 

General Rules Number 1, Governing Granting Li- 
censes for Bunker Fuel, Port, Sea, and Ship's Stores 
and Supplies, Issued by the War Trade Board, Jan. 19, 
1918. United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, 
vol. II, 947-8. 

The instructions for the United States Navy in 
1917 did not permit diversion. 

4. "48. If the papers do not furnish conclusive evidence 
of the innocent character of the vessel, the cargo, and voy- 
age, or probable cause for capture, the boarding officer shall 
continue the examination by questioning the personnel or by 



25 

searching the vessel or by examining the cargo. If such fur- 
ther examination furnishes satisfacory evidence of inno- 
cency, the vessel shall be released; otherwise she shall be 
seized and sent in for adjudication." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917) , 22. 

Documents and practice since the World War in- 
dicate that with the rapid development of the air- 
plane and submarine maritime nations have come to 
accept diversion for search after visit and under 
certain conditions for visit and search. 

1. Article 40. "Aircraft on board vessels of war, including 
aircraft-carriers, shall be regarded as part of such vessel." 

General Report of the Commission of Jurists at the 
Hague, (1923). 17 A. J. I. Z., (1923), Supp., 255. 
Also, Draft Convention on Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War. Art. 3. 33 A. J. 
I. Z., Supp. (1939), 176. 

2. "A certain degree of deviation for visit and search has 
always been admitted as lawful. Such deviation has been 
common when, because the state of the sea made it impossible 
to visit and search when the summoned vessel has come to, 
the vessel is escorted to a safer place. This is not an arbi- 
trary act of the visiting vessel. The ordering of a neutral 
vessel to go to port for examination' as has been proposed at 
times in an exercise of authority which a belligerent craft 
does not possess. 

"A surface or submarine vessel of war is not to be allowed 
to deviate a vessel from its course unless a prize crew is put 
on board or an escort is furnished. A mere order is of no 
effect, as the merchant vessel is not subject to the orders but 
may be under the physical control of a vessel of war so long 
as that is effective. Until other rules are accepted, this prin- 
ciple would apply to aircraft." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1930, 112. 

3. "Art. 107. If, without furnishing grounds for seizure 
or capture, the visit to a ship gives rise to, or does not remove, 
a reasonable ground for suspecting the ship to be liable to 



28 

nature of the vessel which is to perform the visit or of the 
vessel to be visited." 

Article 62. "Instructions as to course for the purpose of 
search are admissible if: 

1. There are still strong reasons for suspicion after the 
visit has been made and 

2. The searching of the vessel on the spot is impossible 
or inexpedient." 

Article 63. "(1) A vessel which does not obey the in- 
structions as to course can be compelled to do so by force. 
(2) It is liable to capture." 

German Prize Law Code of Aug. 28, 1939. Hack- 
worth, G. H., Digest of International Laio^ (1943), 
vol. VII, 196. 

8. "It was explained at the Department of State that 
injury to American vessels destined to European ports has 
not resulted in the main from their diversion from the 
high seas to belligerent ports. As a general practice, for 
reasons of their own, the vessels which cleared from ports 
of the United States on or before November 4, the effective 
date of the Neutrality Act of 1939, ordinarily put into bel- 
ligerent ports en route to their destinations, and the 
principal thus far has arisen in connection with delay in- 
volved on the examination of the vessels and their cargoes 
before being permitted to proceed on their voyages." 

Department of State press release, Dec. 15, 1939. 
The Department of State Bulletin, Dec. 16, 1939, Vol. 
I, No. 25, Publication 1415, 696. 

9. "It was suggested in that note that neutral vessels 
en route to certain countries should voluntarily call at one 
of the several 'contraband control' bases designated by your 
Government in order that the examination of their cargoes 
might be facilitated, by examination in port rather than 
on the high seas. Since, pursuant to the Act of Congress 
approved November 4, 1939, and the President's Proclama- 
tion of the same date, it becomes illegal for American ves- 
sels to enter the so-called combat zone about the British 
Isles and the Northern coast of Europe, they are thereby 
precluded from voluntarily entering the 'contraband con- 
trol' bases within the combat zone, and Your Excellency's 



note is understood as undertaking to reserve a right of your 
Government to divert American vessels to such bases, by 
force if necessary acting, in that respect, without regard 
to the municipal law of the United States or the rights, 
obligations, and liabilities of American vessels under that 
law." 

"It is my belief that such a spirit of liberality on the 
part of American shipping interests should be met by a 
corresponding degree of accommodation and flexibility on 
the part of the British Government, and that such mutual 
deferences should avoid giving rise to any occasion for the- 
forcible diversion of such American vessels to those bel- 
ligerent ports which they are by the law of the United! 
States prohibited from entering." 

The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador 
in Washington, Dec. 14, 1939. The Department of 
State Bulletin, Jan. 6, 1940, Vol. II, No. 28, Publica- 
tion 1422, 4. 
10. "This Government feels constrained to express its 
serious concern at the treatment by the British authorities 
of American shipping in the Mediterranean area, and par- 
ticularly at Gibraltar. It has already made clear its posi- 
tion as regards the legality of interference by the British 
Government with cargoes moving from one neutral country 
to another, in its Ambassador's Note number 1569 of No- 
vember 20, 1939. In addition, it now regrets the necessity 
of being forced to observe not only that British interfer- 
ence, carried out under the theory of contraband control,, 
has worked a wholly unwarrantable delay on American 
shipping to and from the Mediterranean area ; but also that 
the effect of such action appears to have been discrimina- 
tory." 

Aide Memoire from the United States to Great 
Britain, Jan. 20, 1940. The Department of State Bulle- 
tin, Jan. 27, 1940, Vol. II, No. 31, Publication 1428. 93. 

A British royal proclamation on Sept. 8, 1939, 
established five control bases: Kirkwall, Wey- 
mouth, The Downs, Gibraltar, and Haifa. Vessels 
bound for enemy territory or ports in neutral 



30 

countries from which goods can conveniently be 
forwarded to enemy territory were " urgently ad- 
vised to call voluntarily ' ' at one of these bases. 
Vessels which do not call voluntarily are liable to 
be diverted to a base in cases where adequate 
search at sea is not practicable. The British 
Ministry of Information later added that the 
practice of the British navy would be to board 
the merchant ship for examination of its papers. 
When this is found impracticable because of the 
weather or other reasons, the neutral vessel might 
be taken into a harbor. 

In the first ten weeks of World War II, 900 
ships were examined at British control bases. Of 
these, forty-two were American ships. All Ameri- 
can ships were eventually released. 

1. "In a note of November 9, 1939 the British Ambassa- 
dor recalled his Government's announced intention to use 
its belligerent rights to the full and referred to the 
'liability' of merchant vessels to be diverted to a contra- 
band-control base in the event that they did not call at such 
base voluntarily." 

Hackworth, G. H., Digest of International Law, 
(1943), Vol. VII, 196. 

The current trend indicates that if for any rea- 
son search at sea is impracticable, the vessel may 
be escorted by the summoning vessel or another 
vessel to the nearest place where search may con- 
veniently be made. The vessel must proceed ac- 
cording to the orders of the escorting vessel but 
should not be required to lower her flag. 

Similarly, if circumstances make visit and search 
impracticable, a belligerent military aircraft may 
order a neutral civil craft, subsurface, surface or 
air, to proceed under escort as directed. 



II. Destruction of Prizes 

1. Enemy Prizes. 

Since title to a captured enemy vessel vests in 
the captor's government by virtue of the fact of 
capture, enemy ships made prizes may in case of 
military necessity be destroyed by the capturing 
officer when they cannot be sent or escorted in for 
adjudication, provided that the ship's papers and 
documents, the passengers and crew, and, if prac- 
ticable, their personal effects, are placed in safety. 

1. Article 14. "In case of military or other necessity, 
merchant vessels of an enemy may be destroyed, or they 
may be retained for the service of the Government." 

Article 50. "If there are controlling reasons why vessels 
that are properly captured may not be sent in for adjudica- 
tion — such as unseaworthiness, the existence of infectious 
disease, or the lack of a prize crew — they may be appraised 
and sold, and if this cannot be done, they may be destroyed. 
The imminent danger of recapture would justify destruc- 
tion if there should be no doubt that the vessel was a 
proper prize. But in all such cases all of the papers and 
other testimony should be sent to the prize court, in order 
that a decree may be duly entered. 

The United States Naval War Code of 1900. United 
States Naval War College, International Law Discus- 
sions, 1903; 53, 88. 

2. Article XCI. "In the following cases, and when it is 
unavoidable, the captain of the man-of-war may destroy a 
captured vessel or dispose of her according to the exigency 
of the occasion. But before so destroying or disposing of 
her he shall transship all persons on board, and as far as 
possible the cargo also, and shall preserve the ship's papers 
and all other documents required for judicial examination : 

"(1) When the captured vessel is in very bad condition, 
and cannot be navigated on account of the heavy sea. 

31 



32 

"(2) When there is apprehension that the vessel may be 
recaptured by the enemy. 

"(3) When the man-of-war cannot man the prize with- 
out so reducing her own complement as to endanger her 
safety." 

Japanese Regulations, 1904. United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 1925, 74-5. 

3. Article 1. "During a war the commander of H. M. 
ships of war have the right to stop and search enemy and 
neutral merchant vessels, and to seize — and, in exceptional 
cases, to destroy — the same, together with the enemy and 
neutral goods found thereon." 

German Prize Code (1909) as in force July 1, 1915. 
Huberich and King, The Prize Code of the German 
Empire, (New York, 1915), 1. 

4. Article 122. "A captured enemy vessel may be de- 
stroyed if the taking of such vessel to a Japanese port is 
considered to involve danger to the ship of war or to the 
success of her operations." 

Article 123. "Before destroying a vessel (enemy) under 
the preceding article, the commanding officer of the warship 
must remove all the persons on board to a safe place and 
must take on board his ship all the papers necessary for 
trial of the vessel." 

Japanese Regulations, 1914. United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 1925, 78-9. 

5. "The sinking of prizes is in itself a questionable act to 
be resorted to only in extraordinary circumstances and 
after provision has been made for the safety of all the crew 
or passengers, if there are passengers on board. The re- 
sponsibility for discrimniating between neutral and enemy 
vessels, and between neutral and enemy cargo, obviously 
rests with the attacking ship, whose duty it is to verify the 
status and character of the vessel and cargo and to preserve 
all papers before sinking or even capturing it. So also is 
the humane duty of providing for the safety of the crews 
of merchant vessels, whether neutral or enemy, an obligation 
upon every belligerent." 



33 

British-French memorandum to the neutral States, 
Mar. 1, 1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1915, 
Supp., 127. 

6. "5. If visit and search disclose that the vessel is of 
belligerent nationality, the vessel may be sunk only if it is 
impossible to take it into port, provided that the persons on 
board are put in a place of safety and loss of neutral prop- 
erty is indemnified. 

"NOTE: (a) A place of safety is not an open boat out 
of sight of land. 

"(b) A place of safety is not an open boat, if the wind is 
strong, the sea rough, or the weather thick, or if it is very 
cold. 

"(c) A place of safety is not an open boat which is over- 
crowded or is small or unseaworthy or insufficiently 
manned." 

U. S. Secretary of State to Ambassador in Germany, 
April 28, 1916. United States Foreign Relations, 1916, 
Supp., 252. 

7. "94. An enemy ship made prize may be destroyed by 
the capturing officer in case of military necessity, when the 
vessel can not be sent or brought in for adjudication. 

"95. Engaging in unneutral service as defined in para- 
graph 39 stamps a neutral vessel with hostile character, 
and such a neutral vessel made prize may be destroyed by 
the capturing officer in the case of military necessity, when 
the vessel cannot be sent or brought in for adjudication." 

"97. In no case after a vessel had been brought to may 
it be destroyed until after visit and search has been made 
and all persons on board have been placed in safety, and 
also, if practicable, their personal effects. 

"All the documents, letters, and papers found on board 
the prize shall be taken on board the capturing vessel of 
war and be inventoried and sealed in accordance with the 
procedure of section 4615, Revised Statutes (see page 28) 
for delivery to the prize court, with especial view to the 
protection of the interests of the owners of any innocent 
neutral cargo on board. All mails on board should be saved 
so far as possible and practicable." 



34 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 35. 

8. "There is, of course, no doubt as to the right to make 
prize of an enemy ship on the high seas, and, under certain 
conditions, to destroy her, and equally no doubt of the ob- 
ligation to safeguard the lives of all persons aboard, whether 
passengers or crew." 

The Lusitania, 251 Fed. 734 (S. D. N. Y., 1918) . 

9. Article 1. "(1) A merchant vessel must be ordered to 
submit to visit and search to determine its character before 
it can be seized. 

"A merchant vessel must not be attacked unless it refuses 
to submit to visit and search after warning, or to proceed 
as directed after seizure. 

"A merchant vessel must not be destroyed unless the crew 
and passengers have been first placed in safety. 

"(2) Belligerent submarines are not under any circum- 
stance exempt from the universal rules above stated; and 
if a submarine cannot capture a merchant vessel in con- 
formity with these rules, the existing law of nations requires 
it to desist from attack and to permit the merchant vessel to 
proceed unmolested." 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Relation to the Use of Submarines and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922) . Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. Z., 
(1922),/%?^., 58. 

10. Article 57. "Private aircraft which are found upon 
visit and search to be enemy aircraft may be destroyed if 
the belligerent commanding officer finds it necessary to do 
so, provided that all persons on board have first been placed 
in safety and all the papers of the aircraft have been 
preserved." 

General Report of the Commissions of Jurists at the 
Hague, (1923). 17 A. J, I. Z., (1923), Supp., 259. 

11. Article 1. "The following rules shall govern com- 
merce in time of war: 

"1. Warships of the belligerents have the right to stop 
and visit on the high seas and in territorial waters that are 
not neutral any merchant ship with the object of ascer- 
taining its character and nationality and v of verifying 



35 

whether it conveys cargo prohibited by international law 
or has committed any violation of blockade. If the mer- 
chant ship does not heed the signal to stop, it may be 
pursued by the warship and stopped by force; outside of 
such a case the ship cannot be attacked unless, after being 
hailed, it fails to observe the instructions given it. 

"The ship shall not be rendered incapable of navigation 
before the crew and passengers have been placed in safety. 
"2. Belligerent submarines are subject to the foregoing 
rules." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the 
United States and Other American Republics, (1928). 
United States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2-3. 

12. Article 22. "The following are accepted as established 
rules of International Law : 

"(1) In their action with regard to merchant ships, sub- 
marines must conform to the rules of International Law 
to which surface vessels are subject. 

"(2) In particular, except in the case of persistent refusal 
to stop on being duly summoned, or of active resistance to 
visit and search, a warship whether surface vessel or sub- 
marine, may not sink or render incapable of navigation a 
merchant vessel without having first placed passengers, crew 
and ship's papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the 
ship's boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the 
safety of the passengers and crew is assured, in the exist- 
ing sea and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, 
or the presence of another vessel which is in a position to 
take them on board." 

Treaty between the United States and Other Powers 
for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament 
(1930). United States Treaty Series, No. 830, 27. Also 
the proces- verbal, (1936). 173 League of Nations 
Treaty Series, 353. 

13. The International Agreement for Collective Meas- 
ures against Piratical Attacks in the Mediterranean by 
Submarines signed at Nyon on Sept. 14, 1937 invoked the 
rules stated in the Treaty between the United States and 
Other Powers for Limitation and Reducation of Naval 
Armament, (1930), and in the proces-verbal of 1936. 



36 

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ire- 
land, Bulgaria, Egypt, France, Greece, Rumania, Turkey, 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and Yugoslavia 
were signatories. 

United" States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1938, 100-103. 

The same rules were applied to aircraft through the fol- 
lowing provision of the Supplementary Agreement to the 
Nyon Arrangement : 

"II. The present Agreement applies to any attack by a 
surface vessel or an aircraft upon any merchant vessel in 
the Mediterranean not belonging to either of the conflicting 
Spanish parties, when such attack is accompanied by a 
violation of the humanitarian principles embodied in the 
rules of international law with regard to warfare at sea, 
which are referred to in Part IV of the Treaty of London 
of April 22nd, 1930, and confirmed in the Protocol signed 
in London on November 6th, 1936." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1938, 104. 

14. Article 54. "(3) In particular, except in the case of 
persistent refusal to stop on being duly summoned, or of 
active resistance to visit or search, a warship, whether sur- 
face or submarine, or a military aircraft, may not sink 
or render incapable of navigation an unarmed merchant 
vessel without having first placed passengers, crew and 
ship's papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the 
ship's boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the 
safety of the passengers and crew is assured, in the existing 
sea and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or by 
the presence of another vessel which is in a position to take 
them on board." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. L. (1939), JSupp., 186, 

15. "That a belligerent may lawfully destroy before con- 
demnation enemy vessels captured as prizes, subject to cer- 
tain conditions, is generally admitted." "It should be noted 
that among the conditions almost uniformly recognized and 
carried out, at least before the World War, were those re- 



37 

quiring that there be some necessity for the destruction, and 
that all persons on the vessel to be destroyed be placed in 
safety." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neutral 

States in Naval and Aerial War (Harvard Law 

School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L. (1939), Supp., 563. 

16. Article 72. "Captured enemy vessels may be destroyed 

if it appears to be inexpedient or unsafe to bring them 

to port." 

Article 74. "(1) The destruction of vessels in accordance 
with Articles 72 and 73 is admissible only if the passengers r 
crew, and papers of the vessel have been brought to a place 
of safety before destruction. 

"(2) Ship's boats are not to be regarded as a place of 
safety unless the safety of passengers and crew under the 
existing conditions of the sea and the weather is assured by 
the proximity of land or the presence of another vessel 
which is able to take them on board." 

German Price Code (1939). Hackworth, G. H., 
Digest of International Law (Washington, 1943). 
Vol. VII, 255, 248. 

The British Legation at Montevideo, Uruguay, 
announced on Sept. 4, 1939, the first sinking of a 
German merchant ship in World War II. The 
German ship, the Olinda, was stopped by the Ajax, 
a British cruiser. British officers boarded the 
Olinda and ordered the Olinda 9 8 officers and crew 
to abandon ship. The German officers and crew 
were given time to pack their personal belongings. 
After the crew had been picked up by a British 
tanker standing by, the Ajax shelled and sank the 
Olinda. The tanker carried the OMnda's crew to 
Montevideo. 

If innocent neutral goods are destroyed with the 
enemy prize, the owner of such goods is entitled to 
compensation. 



38 

1. Article 3. "Neutral goods, with the exception of con- 
traband of war, are not liable to capture under the enemy's 
flag;" 

Declaration of Paris, (1856). (translation) 

3. "La marchandise neutre, a l'exception de la con- 

trabande de guerre, n'est par saissable sous pavilion 

ennemi ;" 
British and Foreign State Papers, Vol. 46, (1855- 

1856), 27. 

2. "68. 'Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of 
war, are not liable to capture under the enemy's flag.' " 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
erning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917), 27. Many bi- 
lateral treaties between the United States and foreign 
states have included this article from the Declaration of 
Paris, as for example the treaty with Bolivia, (1858), 
article 16. Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, I, 119. 

3. Article 53. "If neutral goods not liable to condemnation 
have been destroyed with the vessel, the owner of such goods 
is entitled to compensation." 

Declaration of London, (1909). Not ratified. Brit- 
ish Parliamentary Papers, Misc. No. 4, (1909), (Cd. 
4554), 86. 

4. "5. If a visit and search disclose that the vessel is of bel- 
ligerent nationality, the vessel may be sunk only if it is im- 
possible to take it into port, provided that the persons on 
board are put in a place of safety and loss of neutral prop- 
erty is indemnified." 

United States Secretary of State to the Ambassador in 
Germany, Apr. 28, 1916. United States Foreign Rela- 
tions, 1916, Supp., 252. 

5. "The British view has been that when an enemy vessel 
captured as price is destroyed, the captor must pay for inno- 
cent neutral cargo destroyed with the vessel." 

Draft Convention on the Bights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 557. 

2. Neutral Prizes. 

The right to destroy neutral merchant vessels 
captured as prizes was not generally claimed nor 



39 

exercised before the Russo-Japanese War. By 
1914, however, the right to destroy neutral prizes 
was already being claimed by a number of countries 
subject to the condition that passengers, crews, and 
the ships' papers be removed to a place of safety. 

1. Article 50. "If there are controlling reasons why vessels 
that are properly captured may not be sent in for adjudica- 
tion — such as unseaworthiness, the existence of infectious 
disease, or the lack of a prize crew — they may be appraised 
and sold, and if this cannot be done, they may be destroyed. 
The imminent danger of recapture would justify destruction 
if there should be no doubt that the vessel was a proper prize. 
But in all such cases all of the papers and other testimony 
should be sent to the prize court, in order that a decree may 
be duly entered." 

The United States Naval War Code of 1900. United 
States Naval War College, International Lam Discus- 
sions, 1903, 88. 

2. "States have been much less inclined, however, to claim 
or exercise the right to destroy neutral merchant vessels 
captured as prizes. Few, if any, instances of such destruc- 
tion before condemnation prior to the Eusso-Japanese War 
have been found." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment 33 A. J. I. Z., (1939), Supp., 563. 

3. "There is, thus, no clear record of destruction of a sea- 
worthy neutral vessel not alleged to be guilty of unneutral 
service prior to the Eusso-Japanese War." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neutral 
States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. Z., (1939), Supp., 564. 

4. Article XCI. "In the following cases, and when it is 
unavoidable, the captain of the man-of-war may destroy a 
captured vessel or dispose of her according to the exigency 
of the occasion. But before so destroying or disposing of her 
he shall transship all persons on board, and as far as possible 
the cargo also, and shall preserve the ship's papers and all 
other documents required for judicial examination : 



40 

(1) When the captured vessel is in very bad condition, 
and cannot be navigated on account of the heavy sea. 

(2) When there is apprehension that the vessel may be re- 
captured by the enemy. 

(3) When the man-of-war cannot man the prize with- 
out so reducing her own complement as to endanger her 
safety." 

Japanese Regulations (1904). United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 1925, 
74-5. 

5. "Neutral vessels. — If a seized neutral vessel cannot for 
any reason be brought into port for adjudication, it should 
be dismissed." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Topics and Discussions, 1905, 62. 

6. "From the opinions, precedents, rules, treaties, etc., 
thus far stated it is evident that the treatment of neutral 
vessels in the time of war is not yet a fully settled 
question." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1907, 106. 

7. "Destruction, on account of military necessity, of a 
neutral vessel guilty only of the carriage of contraband 
entitles the owner to fullest compensation. Before destruc- 
tion all persons and papers should be placed in safety." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1907, 108. 

8. Article 48. "A neutral vessel which has been captured 
may not be destroyed by the captor; she must be taken 
into such port as is proper for the determination there of 
all questions concerning the validity of the capture." 

Article 49. "As an exception, a neutral vessel which has 
been captured by a belligerent warship, and which would 
be liable to condemnation, may be destroyed if the observ- 
ance of Article 48 would involve danger to the safety of 
the warship or to the success of the operations in which 
she is engaged at the time." 

Article 50. "Before the vessel is destroyed all persons 
on board must be placed in safety, and all the ship's papers 
and other documents which the parties interested consider 



41 

relevant for the purpose of deciding on the validity of the 
capture must be taken on board the warship." 

Article 51. "A captor who has destroyed a neutral ves- 
sel must, as a condition precedent to any decision upon 
the validity of the capture, establish in fact that he only 
acted in the face of an exceptional necessity, such as is 
contemplated in article 49. Failing to do this, he must 
compensate the parties interested without as to whether or 
not the capture was valid." 

Article 53. "If neutral goods which were not liable to 
condemnation have been destroyed with the vessel, the 
owner of such goods is entitled to compensation." 

Declaration of London, (1909). Not ratified. Brit- 
ish Parliamentary Payers. Misc. No. 4, (1909) (Cd. 
4554). 86. 

9. Article 1. "During a war the commanders of H. M. 
ships of war have the right to stop and search enemy and 
neutral merchant vessels, and to seize — and, in exceptional 
cases, to destroy — the same, together with the enemy and 
neutral goods found thereon." 

. Article 113. "When a neutral vessel has been captured 
under the circumstances set forth in article 39 for carrying 
contraband, or in articles 77 and 78, for breach of blockade, 
or in article 51, for rendering unneutral services, the com- 
mander may destroy the same, provided that : 

(a) the vessel is subject to condemnation, and in addi- 
tion thereto, 

(b) the bringing into port would subject the war vessel 
to danger, or be liable to impede the success of the opera- 
tions in which it is at the time engaged. Among other 
circumstances, this may, inter alia, be assumed to be the 
case, if: 

(a) the vessel, on account of its defective condition or by 
reason of deficiency of supplies, cannot be brought into 
port; or 

(b) the vessel cannot follow the war vessel, and is there- 
fore liable to recapture; or 

(c) the proximity of the enemy forces gives ground for 
a fear of recapture ; or 



42 

(d) the war vessel is not in a position to furnish an 
adequate prize crew." 

Article 116. "Before proceeding to a destruction of the 
vessel, the safety of all persons on board, and, so far as 
possible, their effects, is to be provided for, and all ship's 
papers and other evidentiary material, which, according 
to the views of the persons at interest, is of value for the 
formulation of the judgment of the prize court, are to be 
taken over by the commander." 

Huberich and King,* The Prize Code of the Ger- 
man Empire, (New York, 1915), 1, 66-7, and 68. 

During the World War, most nations tacitly or 
expressly approved and followed the Declaration 
of London. Neutral prizes were destroyed only in 
cases of military necessity and only after pas- 
sengers, crews, and ships' papers were removed to 
a place of safety. 

1. "The practice of nations in the past, stated generally, 
has been to sink prizes of war taken on the high seas if 
either the ship or any part of her cargo was neutral prop- 
erty only when military necessity made this course im- 
perative. This practice has now been embodied, at least 
in part, in the rules of the Declaration of London, which 
Germany appears to have adopted for her guidance in the 
present naval warfares, and on which she has presumably 
based her action in this instance. It is not to be pre- 
sumed, however, that the German Government will refuse 
to grant indemnity for neutral property which has been 
lost in such manner and which would otherwise have been 
restored by a court of prize." 

Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of the 
Coffee Exchange of the City of New York, Oct. 9, 
1914. United States Foreign Relations, 1914, jSupp. y 
319. 

2. Article 126. "A neutral vessel captured and which 
would be liable to condemnation, may be destroyed, if tak- 
ing such vessel to a Japanese port would involve danger to 
the Japanese ship of war or to the success of the operations 
in which she is at the time engaged." 



43 

Article 128. "The commanding officer of a ship of war 
who has destroyed a neutral vessel must, as a condition 
precedent to any decision upon the validity of the cap- 
ture, establish in fact that he only acted in the face of 
an exceptional necessity such as is contemplated in article 
126." 

Article 127. "Before the destruction mentioned in the 
preceding article, the commanding officer of the warship 
shall remove the persons on board to a place of safety, and 
all the ship's papers and other documents which are con- 
sidered relevant for the decision as to the validity of the 
capture must be taken on board the warship." 

United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1925, 74, 77, and 79. 

3. "Germany and Austria-Hungary practiced the destruc- 
tion of neutral prizes in a large scale, aside from the de- 
struction of vessels in war zones." 

"Allied warships, however, generally refrained from de- 
stroying neutral vessels." "The British apparently never 
destroyed any neutral prize." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 
572, 571. 

4. "Germany never seriously asserted a general right to 
destroy neutral vessels without placing all the persons on 
board in safety; the indiscriminate sinkings in war zones 
and elsewhere were said to be justified on the grounds of 
retaliation and self-preservation." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 
575. 

Cases : 

1. Sinking of the William P. Frye. United 

States Foreign Relations, 1915, Supp., 360. 

2. The Cysne. 

Lauterpacht, Annual Digest of Public In- 
ternational Law Cases, 1929-1930, 487- 
491. 

615960—45 4 



44 

5. "The sinking of prizes is in itself a questionable act 
to be resorted to only in extraordinary circumstances and 
after provision has been made for the safety of all the 
crew or passengers, if there are passengers on board. The 
responsibility for discriminating between neutral and enemy 
vessels, and between neutral and enemy cargo, obviously 
rests with the attacking ship, whose duty it is to verify the 
status and character of the vessel and cargo and to preserve 
all papers before sinking or even capturing it. So also is 
the humane duty of providing for the safety of the crews of 
merchant vessels, whether neutral or enemy, an obligation 
upon every belligerent." 

British-French memorandum to the neutral states, 
March 1, 1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1915, 
Supp., 127. 

6. "6. If, however, visit and search disclose that the vessel 
is of neutral nationality, it must not be sunk in any cir- 
cumstances, except of gravest importance to the captor's 
state, and then only in accordance with the above provisos 
and notes." 

Secretary of State to Ambassador in Germany, April 
28, 1916. United States Foreign Relations, 1916, Supp., 
252. 

7. "95. Engaging in unneutral service as defined in para- 
graph 39 stamps a neutral vessel with hostile character, and 
such a neutral vessel made prize may be destroyed by the 
capturing officer in the case of military necessity, when the 
vessel can not be sent or brought in for adjudication. 

"96. Owing to the serious responsibility involved, a neu- 
tral vessel not engaged in unneutral service as defined in 
paragraph 39, must not be destroyed by the capturing officer 
save in case of the gravest military emergency which would 
not justify him in releasing the vessel or sending it in for 
adjudication. If circumstances permit, it is preferable to 
appraise and sell the prize, as provided in section 4615, Re- 
vised Statutes (see page 28) rather than to destroy it. 

"97. In no case after a vessel has been brought to may 
it be destroyed until after visit and search has been made 
and all persons on board have been placed in safety, and 
also, if practicable, their personal effects. 



45 

"All the documents, letters, and papers found on 
board the prize shall be taken on board the capturing 
vessel of war and be inventoried and sealed in accordance 
with the procedure of section 4615, Revised Statutes (see 
page 28) for delivery to the prize court, with especial view 
to the protection of the interests of the owners of any inno- 
cent neutral cargo on board. All mails on board should be 
saved so far as possible and practicable." 

Instructions for the Navy of the United States Gov- 
ernning Maritime Warfare, (June, 1917) , 35. 
8. "The practice during the World War indicated a gen- 
eral acceptance of the view that destruction of neutral ves- 
sels was lawful under certain circumstances, and the provi- 
sions of the Declaration of London were openly or tacitly 
approved by most States, belligerent and neutral." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp., 
571. 

Although there has still been some discussion 
since the World War as to whether or not a neutral 
prize should be destroyed, practice and documents 
indicate that the destruction of neutr ; al vessels 
and aircraft captured as prizes may be destroyed 
only if warranted by the extreme seriousness of 
the military situation and by the utter impractica- 
bility of bringing the prize in for adjudication. 
In the case of destruction, passengers (if possible, 
their personal effects also), the crew, and the 
craft's papers must be placed in safety. 

1. Article 1. "(1) A merchant vessel must be ordered 
to submit to visit and search to determine its character be- 
fore it can be seized. 

"A merchant vessel must not be attacked unless it refuses 
to submit to visit and search after warning, or to proceed as 
directed after seizure. 

"A merchant vessel must not be destroyed unless the crew 
and passengers have been first placed in safety. 



46 

"(2) Belligerent submarines are not under any circum- 
stance exempt from the universal rules above stated; and 
if a submarine cannot capture a merchant vessel in con- 
formity with these rules the existing law of nations requires 
it to desist from attack and to permit the merchant vessel 
to proceed unmolested." 

Treaty Concluded at the Washington Naval Confer- 
ence in Kelation to the Use of Submarine and Noxious 
Gases in Warfare, (1922). Not ratified. 16 A. J. I. L. r 
(1922), /%?£>., 58. 

2. Article 57. "Private aircraft which are found upon 
visit and search to be enemy aircraft may be destroyed if 
the belligerent commanding officer finds it necessary to do 
so, provided that all persons on board have first been placed 
in safety and all the papers of the aircraft have been pre- 
served." 

Article 58. "Private aircraft which are found upon visit 
and search to be neutral aircraft liable to condemnation 
upon the ground of unneutral service, or upon the ground 
that they have no external marks or are bearing false marks ; 
may be destroyed, if sending them in for adjudication would 
be impossible or would imperil the safety of the belligerent 
aircraft or the success of the operations in which it is en- 
gaged. Apart from the cases mentioned above, a neutral 
private aircraft must not be destroyed except in the gravest 
military emergency, which would not justify the officer in 
command in releasing it or sending it in for adjudication," 

Article 59. "Before a neutral private aircraft is destroyed, 
all persons on board must be placed in safety, and all the 
papers of the aircraft must be preserved. 

"A captor who had destroyed a neutral private aircraft 
must bring the capture before the prize court, and must 
first establish that he was justified in destroying it under 
Article 58. If he fails to do this, parties interested in the 
aircraft or its cargo are entitled to compensation. If the 
capture is held to be invalid, though the act of destruction 
is held to have been justifiable, compensation must be paid 
to the parties interested in place of the restitution to which 
they would have been entitled." 



47 

Article 60. "Where a neutral private aircraft is cap- 
tured on the ground that it is carrying contraband, the 
captor may demand the surrender of any absolute contra- 
band on board, or may proceed to the destruction of such 
absolute contraband, if sending in the aircraft for adjudica- 
tion is impossible or would imperil the safety of the bel- 
ligerent aircraft or the success of the operations in which 
it is engaged. After entering in the log book of the air- 
craft the delivery or destruction of the goods, and securing, 
in original or copy, the relevant papers of the aircraft, the 
captor must allow the neutral aircraft to continue its flight. 

"The provisions of the second paragraph of Article 59 
will apply when absolute contraband on board a neutral 
private aircraft is handed over or destroyed." 

"General Report of the Commission of Jurists at the 
Hague, (1923) 17 A. J. I. Z., (1923), Supp., 259-260. 

3. Article 1. "The following rules shall govern commerce 
in time of war : 

"1. Warships of the belligerents have the right to stop 
and visit on the high seas and in territorial waters that 
are not neutral any merchant ship with the object of ascer- 
taining its character and nationality and of verifying" 
whether it conveys cargo prohibited by international law 
or has committed any violation of blockade. If the mer- 
chant ship does not heed the signal to stop, it may be pur- 
sued by the warship and stopped by force ; outside of such 
;a case the ship cannot be attacked unless, after being hailed, 
it fails to observe the instructions given it. 

"The ship shall not be rendered incapable of navigation 
before the crew and passengers have been placed in safety. 

"2. Belligerent submarines are subject to the foregoing 
rules." 

Convention on Maritime Neutrality between the 
United States and Other American Republics, '(1928). 
United States Treaty Series, No. 845, 2-3. 

4. Article 22. "The following are accepted as established 
rules of International Law : 

"(1) In their action with regard to merchant ships, sub- 
marines must conform to the rules of International Law 
to which surface vessels are subject. 



48 

"(2) In particular, except in the case of persistent refusal 
to stop on being duly summoned, or of active resistance 
to visit and search, a warship whether surface vessel or sub- 
marines, may not sink or render incapable of navigation a 
merchant vessel without having first placed passengers, crew 
and ship's papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the 
ship's boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the 
safety of the passengers and crew is assured, in the existing 
sea and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or the 
presence of another vessel which is in a position to take 
them on board." 

Treaty between the United States and Other Powers 
for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Arma- 
ment (1930). United States Treaty Series, No. 830, 27. 
Also the proces-verbal, 1936). 173 League of Nations 
Treaty Series, 353. 
5. Article 54. "(3) In particular, except in the case of 
persistent refusal to stop on being duly summoned, or of 
active resistance to visit or search, a warship, whether sur- 
face or submarine, or a military aircraft, may not sink or 
render incapable of navigation an unarmed merchant vessel 
without having first placed passengers, crew and ship's 
papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the ship's 
boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the safety 
of the passengers and crew is assured, in the existing sea 
and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or by the 
presence of another vessel which is in a position to take 
them on board." 

Article 61. "(1) If a vessel does not display the distinctive 
colors and markings required of a certified vessel under 
Article 44, or fails to produce a certificate of neutrality, and 
if the belligerent as a result of visit and search has reason- 
able grounds for belief that the vessel or its cargo is subject 
to condemnation or preemption, the belligerent may capture 
the vessel and conduct or send it to one of its ports for 
prize proceedings. If to conduct or send the captured vessel 
to port would involve danger to the safety of the captor 
or to the success of the operations in which he is engaged 
at the time, the captured vessel may be destroyed subject to 
compliance with the rules laid down in Article 54. In such 



49 

cases prize proceedings shall be held on the basis of the 

ship's papers and other lawful evidence." 

Draft Convention on the Bights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). 33 A. J. I. Z., (1939), Supp., 186, 187. 

6. " * * * States evince greater readiness to destroy 
neutral vessels guilty of unneutral service than those guilty 
only of carrying contraband." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. L Z., (1939), Supp., 564. 

7. Article 73, "(1) Captured neutral vessels may be de- 
stroyed if : 

"1. They were captured because of proceeding under 
enemy convoy, forcible resistance, or aid to the enemy and 

"2. It appears to be inexpedient or unsafe to bring them 
to port. 

(2) By way of exception neutral vessels which were cap- 
tured for reasons other than those named in par. 1 No. 1 
may likewise be destroyed if : 

"1. Their condemnation would be expected as a certainty 
and 

"2. To bring them to port would expose the vessel which 
captured them to danger or might prejudice the success of 
the enterprises on which it is engaged." 

Article 74. "(1) The destruction of vessels in accordance 
with Articles 72 and 73 is admissible only if the passengers, 
crew, and papers of the vessel have been brought to a place 
of safety before destruction. 

(2) Ship's boats are not to be regarded as a place of 
safety unless the safety of passenger and crew under the 
existing conditions of the seas and the weather is assured 
by the proximity of land or the presence of another vessel 
which is able to take them on board." 

German Prize Law Code (1939). Hackworth, G. H., 
Digest of International Law, (Washington, 1943), 257, 
248. 

8. "The sinking of this American ship by a German sub- 
marine flagrantly violated the right of United States ves- 
sels freely to navigate the seas subject only to a belligerent 



50 

right accepted under international law. This belligerent 
right, as is known to the German Government, does not in- 
clude the right deliberately to sink a merchant vessel, leav- 
ing the passengers and crew to the mercies of the elements. 
On the contrary the belligerent is required to place the pas- 
sengers and crew in places of safety." 
Sinking of the S. S. "Robin Moor" 

Deft, of State Bulletin, Vol. IV, No. 104, June 21, 

1941. United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1940, 237. 

9. "A few months ago an American-flag merchant ship, 
the Robin Moor, was sunk by a Nazi submarine in the mid- 
dle of the South Atlantic, under circumstances violating 
long-established international law and very principle of 
humanity. The passengers and the crew were forced into 
open boats hundreds and miles from land, in direct viola- 
tion of international agreements signed by the Government 
of Germany. No apology, no allegation of mistake, no offer 
or reparations has come from the Nazi Government." 

Freedom of the Seas, address by the President, Sept. 
11, 1941. Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. V, No. 116, Sept. 
13, 1941. United States Naval War College, Interna- 
tional Law Documents, 1941, 15. 

10. "The particularly revolting and horrifying circum- 
stances of the machine-gunning by an Axis submarine crew 
of the survivors of the torpedoed Colombian schooner Reso- 
lute has produced the deepest feeling of indignation in the 
American people. These murderous tactics of Nazi pirate 
crews only serve to redouble the resolve of decent men to 
exterminate the pernicious evil of vicious Nazism." 

Statement by Cor dell Hull, Secretary of State, June 
27, 1942. The Department of State Bulletin, June 27, 

1942, Vol. VI, No. 157, Publication 1761, 562. 



III. War Zones 

The declaration of war zones, waters which neu- 
tral ships could enter only at their own risk, was 
practiced by the belligerents in the World War and 
was excused at first as a matter of retaliation and 
finally as a matter of self-preservation. 

1. Article 3. "When anchored contact mines are employed, 
every possible precaution must be taken for the security of 
peaceful shipping. 

"The belligerents undertake to do their utmost to render 
these mines harmless within a limited time, and, should they 
cease to be under surveillance, to notify the danger zones as 
soon as military exigencies permit, by a notice addressed 
to ship owners, which must also be communicated to the 
Governments through the diplomatic channel." 

Article 4. "Neutral Powers which lay automatic contact 
mines off their coasts must observe the same rules and take 
the same precautions as are imposed on belligerents. 

"The neutral Power must inform ship-owners, by a notice 
issued in advance, where automatic contact mines have 
been laid. This notice must be communicated at once to 
the Governments through the diplomatic channel." 

VIII Hague Convention, (1907). Malloy, Treaties, 
Conventions, II, 2310. 

2. "(e) When mines are employed, every possible pre- 
caution must be taken for the security of peaceful shipping. 

"The belligerents undertake to provide as far as possi- 
ble that these mines shall become harmless within a limited 
time, and should they cease to be under surveillance, to 
notify the danger zones as soon as military exigencies 
permit by a notice to mariners, which must also be com- 
municated to the Governments through the diplomatic 
channel." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Topics and Discussions, 1913, 147. 

51 



52 

3. "During the last week the Germans have scattered 
mines indiscriminately in the open sea on main trade 
route from America to Liverpool via north of Ireland. 

"These mines can not have been laid by any German 
ship of war. They have been laid by some merchant ves- 
sels flying neutral flag which have come along the trade 
route as if for purposes of peaceful commerce and while 
profiting to the full by immunity enjoyed by neutral 
merchant ships have wantonly and recklessly endangered 
the lives of all who travel on the sea regardless of whether 
they are friend or foe, civilian or military in character. 

"In these circumstances, having regard to the great in- 
terests entrusted to the British Navy, to the safety of 
peaceful commerce on high seas, and to the maintenance 
within limits of international law of trade between neutral 
countries, the Admiralty feels it necessary to adopt excep- 
tional measures appropriate to the novel conditions under 
which this war is being waged. 

"They therefore give notice that the whole of the North 
Sea must be considered a military area. Within this area 
merchant shipping of all kinds, traders of all countries, 
fishing craft, and all other vessels will be exposed to the 
gravest dangers from mines which it has been necessary 
to lay and from warships searching vigilantly by night and 
day for suspicious craft." 

British Foreign Office to British Ambassador in 
Washington, presented to the Secretary of State, Nov. 
3, 1914. United States Foreign Relations, 1914, S'upp. f 
464. 
. 4. "The German Government has in vain called the at- 
tention of neutral powers to the fact, that it must face the 
question of whether it can longer persevere in its hitherto 
strict observance of the rules of the London declaration, 
if Great Britain were to continue its course, and the neu- 
tral powers were to continue to acquiesce in these violations 
of neutrality to the detriment of Germany; for her viola- 
tions of international law Great Britain pleads the vital 
interests which the British Empire has at stake, and the 
neutral powers seem to satisfy themselves with theoretical 



53 

protest. Therefore in fact they accept the vital interests 
of belligerents as sufficient excuse for every method of war- 
fare. Germany must now appeal to these same vital in- 
terests to its regret. It therefore sees itself forced to mili- 
tary measures aimed at England in retaliation against the 
English procedure. Just as England has designated the 
area between Scotland and Norway as an area of war, so 
Germany now declares all the waters surrounding Great 
Britain and Ireland including the entire English Channel 
as an area of war, and thus will proceed against the ship- 
ping of the enemy." 

"For this purpose beginning February 18, 1915, it will 
endeavor to destroy every enemy merchant ship that is 
found in this area of war without its always being possible 
to avert the peril, that thus threatens persons and cargoes. 
Neutrals are therefore warned against further entrusting 
crews, passengers and wares to such ships. Their attention 
also called to the fact, that it is advisable for their ships 
to avoid entering this area, for even though the German 
naval forces have instructions to avoid violence to neutral 
ships insofar as they are recognizable, in view of the misuse 
of neutral flags ordered by the British Government and 
the contingencies of naval warfare their becoming victims 
of torpedoes directed against enemy ships cannot always be 
avoided; * * *" 

Imperial Councilor's proclamation, as given by the 

German Ambassador to the Secretary of State, Feb. 

4, 1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1915, Supp., 
■ 96. 

5. "It is of course not necessary to remind the German 
Government that the sole right of a belligerent in dealing 
with neutral vessels on the high seas is limited to visit 
and search, unless a blockade is proclaimed and effectively 
maintained, which this Government does not understand to 
be proposed in this case. To declare or exercise a right 
to attack and destroy any vessel entering a prescribed area 
of the high seas without first certainly determining its 
belligerent nationality and the contraband character of its 
cargo would be an act so unprecedented in naval warfare 



54 

that this Government is reluctant to believe that the Im- 
perial Government of Germany in this case contemplates 
it as possible." 

Secretary of State to Ambassador in Germany, Feb. 

10, 1905. United States Foreign Relations , 1915, Supp.* 

98-99. 

6. "You may inform the Minister for Foreign Affairs that 
this Government does not see its way at the present time to 
joining other governments in protesting to the British Gov- 
ernment against their announcement that ships entering the 
North Sea after November 5 do so at their own peril." 

Secretary of State to Minister in Norway, Nov. 10, 
1914. United States Foreign Relations, 1914, Supp. t 
466. 

7. "In the meanwhile, the British Government has al- 
ready admitted its directions regarding the misuse of neu- 
tral flags. Their execution warrants the assumption that 
English merchant ships will resort to every means of render- 
ing themselves unrecognizable as such. Thereby, in turn,, 
the recognition of neutral merchant vessels is made practi- 
cally impossible, unless they sail by day under convoy, since 
even the painting of the hull in national colors and similar 
methods of identification contemplated by neutrals can be 
straighway copied by English merchant ships. Visit and 
search are put out of the question by reason of the attacks 
to be expected from disguised English merchant ships, since 
the same would expose the boarding party and the submarine 
itself to destruction. In such a state of affairs there can be 
further assurance for the safety of neutral shipping in the 
English naval war zone. In addition, account must be taken 
of an increased danger from mines, since it is intended to 
make the most extensive use of mines in all parts of the war 
area. Neutral vessels must therefore again be most earnestly 
warned against venturing into this area; they may, on the 
other hand, when the case arises, unhesitatingly choose the 
route north of Scotland recommended by the German Ad- 
miralty. 

"The new German method of naval warfare is imposed and 
justified by the murderous character of the English method 
of naval warfare, which seeks to condemn the German peo- 



55 

pie to death by starvation through the destruction of legiti- 
mate trade with neutral foreign countries. 

"Germany will therefore adhere to the announced method 
of warfare until England decides for her part to observe also 
the recognized rules of naval warfare as laid down in the 
Declaration of Paris and the Declaration of London, or until 
she is compelled to do so by the neutral powers." 

German Ambassador to Secretary of State, Feb. 15, 
1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1915, Supp., 
104-105. 

8. "Germany has, so far, not made unrestricted us6 of the 
weapon which she possesses in her submarines. Since the 
Entente powers, however, have made it impossible to come 
to an understanding based upon equality of rights of all na- 
tions, as proposed by the Central powers, and have instead 
declared only such a peace to be possible which shall be dic- 
tated by the Entente allies and shall result in the destruction 
and humiliation of the Central powers, Germany is unable 
further to forego the full use of her submarines." 

"Under these circumstances Germany will meet the illegal 
measures of her enemies by forcibly preventing after Febru- 
ary 1, 1917, in a zone around Great Britain, France, Italy, 
and in the eastern Mediterranean all navigation, that of neu- 
trals included, from and to England and from and to France, 
etc., etc. All ships met within that zone will be sunk." 

Memorandum, enclosed in message from the German 
Ambassador to the Secretary of State, Jan. 31, 1917. 
United States Foreign Relations, 1917, 1, 100. 

9. "The Imperial German Government today gave notice 
of an extension of the submarine blockade according to which 
it will henceforth and without further notice oppose by every 
means in its power any navigation whatsoever of the waters 
of the Arctic Ocean lying east (of the 24th degree of longi- 
tude east) and south of the 75th degree of latitude north, 
with the exception of the Norwegian territorial waters. 
Neutral vessels navigating that zone would do so at their 
risk and peril." 

Swiss Minister (Department of German Interests) to 
the Secretary of State, received Mar. 23, 1917. United 
States Foreign Relations, 1917, Supp. 1, 184, 187. 



56 

10. The Germans extended their zone further — to the Cape 
Verde Islands, Dakar, and the Azores. 

Swiss Minister to Secretary of State, Mar. 4, 1918. 

11. "In view of the unrestricted warfare carried on by 
Germany at sea by means of mines and submarines not only 
against the Allied powers but also against neutral ship- 
ping * * *^ jjj s Majesty's Government gave notice that 
on and after the 7th proximo the undermentioned area in 
the North Sea will be rendered dangerous to all shipping by 
operations against the enemy and it should therefore be 
avoided." 

British Foreign Office, forwarded by the Ambassador 
in Great Britain to Secretary of State, Jan. 24, 1917. 
United States Foreign Relation, 1917, Supp. 1, 518. 

Also, United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, 
Vol. II, 1761, 1765. Zone is called a "mined area", 

12. "As the question of appropriating certain portions of 
the high seas for military operations, to the exclusion of the 
use of the hostile area as a common highway of commerce, 
has not become a settled principle of international law as- 
sented to by the family of nations, it will be recognized that 
the Government of the United States must, and hereby does, 
for the protection of American interests, reserve generally 
all of its rights in the premises, including the right not only 
to question the validity of these measures, but to present 
demands and claims in relation to any American interests 
which may be unlawfully affected, directly or indirectly, by 
virtue of the enforcement of these measures." 

Secretary of State to British Ambassador, Feb. 19 ? 
1917. United States Foreign Relations, 1917, Supp. 1, 
519-520. 

13. "The Government of the United States is also advised 
that the Norwegian Government has been informed that 
the Governments of the United States and Great Britain 
are engaged in laying a barrage across that portion of the 
North Sea lying between Scotland and Norway, which when 
completed will effectively prevent the passage of enemy sub- 
marines to and from the Atlantic Ocean by the northern 
route through the North Sea provided that they are not 



57 

permitted illegal passage through the territorial waters of 
Norway. 5 ' 

Secretary of State to the Charge in Norway, Aug. 27, 

1915. United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, 

Vol. II, 1764-5. 

14. "The United States could hardly have justified this 
action on the basis of retaliation, since it had taken the 
position that inter-belligerent retaliation cannot affect neu- 
tral rights on the high seas." 

Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). Comment. 33 A. J. I. L., (1939), Supp. 705. 

15. "The German Minister in Christiania has informed 
the Foreign Office that owing to previous British declara- 
tions that the North Sea is a war zone and the German Bay 
(Heligoland Bight) a danger zone, the Imperial German 
Government is obliged, in order to meet the situation created 
by the said declarations, to proceed to the extraordinary 
measure of warning neutral ships against navigating in the 
German Bay and against further dangers to which it be- 
comes necessary to expose neutral ships in consequence of 
Britisn warfare in this zone. The danger of navigating in 
this zone can only be avoided by following special directions 
which can be obtained from the German naval authorities." 

Minister in Norway to Secretary of State, Mar. 12, 
1918. United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 1, 
Vol. II, 1763. 

16. "Admiralty Notice No. 1462 announces following 
amended limits of dangerous area Orkney Isles." 

Consul General at London to Secretary of State, Dec. 
14, 1918. United States Foreign Relations, 1918, Supp. 
1, Vol. II, 1765. 

Established as a belligerent practice during the 
World War, the declaration of war zones has not 
been definitely recognized as a belligerent right by 
documents and authoritative texts since the war. 
Post-war papers on this topic are few. In modern 
practice, however, zones have again been pro- 



58 

claimed by belligerents. Some neutrals, including 
the United States, recognized these danger zones 
by proclaiming combat areas. 

1. Article 7. "In case a belligerent commanding officer 
considers that the success of the operation in which he is 
engaged may be prejudiced by the presence of vessels or 
aircraft equipped with radio installations in the immediate 
vicinity of his armed forces or by the use of such installa- 
tions therein, he may order neutral vessels or neutral air- 
craft on or over the high seas : 

1. To alter their course to such an extent as will be neces- 
sary to prevent their approaching the armed forces operat- 
ing under his command • or 

2. Not to make use of their radio transmitting apparatus 
while in the immediate vicinity of such forces. 

A neutral vessel or neutral aircraft, which does not con- 
form to such direction of which it has had notice, exposes 
itself to the risk of being fired upon. It will also be liable 
to capture, and may be condemned if the Prize Court con- 
siders that the circumstances justify condemnation." 

Article 30. "In case a belligerent commanding officer con- 
siders that the presence of aircraft is likely to prejudice the 
success of the operations in which he is engaged at the 
moment, he may prohibit the passing of neutral aircraft 
in the immediate vicinity of his forces or may oblige them 
to follow a particular route. A neutral aircraft which does 
not conform to such directions, of which he has had notice 
issued by the belligerent commanding officer, may be fired 
upon." 

General Report of the Commission of Jurists at the 

Hague, (1923). 17 A. J. I. L. (1923), tiupp;, 242-3, 

253. 
2. Article 70. "A belligerant may not establish on the 
high seas outside of a blockade zone a barred zone or other 
area however described in which it seeks to impose special 
prohibition, restriction or regulation upon the passage of 
neutral vessels. However, a belligerent may require neutral 
vessels in the immediate vicinity of its armed forces not to 



59 

make use of their radio transmitting apparatus except for 
SOS calls while in the Immediate vicinity of such forces." 
Draft Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neu- 
tral States in Naval and Aerial War, (Harvard Law 
School). ZZA.J.I.L., (1939), Supp., 190. 

3. "In September 1939 the British Government gave 
notice that mines had been laid in specified areas in the 
vicinity of the British coast and in areas in the China and 
Mediterranean Seas, as well as in a specified region off the 
German coast." 

Hackworth, G. H., Digest of International Law, 
(Washington, 1943), Vol. VI, 509. 

4. "The use of mines will, as hitherto, continue to be kept 
strictly within the framework of the VIHth Hague Con- 
vention of 1907. In accordance with this Convention the 
mine fields which have been laid have not only been noti- 
fied to the neutral governments but also repeatedly an- 
nounced by radio and the Nautical Warning Service and 
published in the 'Notice to Mariners'." (The Charge d'Af- 
f aires ad interim to Germany to the Secretary of State, Sept. 
20, 1939. 

Hackworth, G. H., Digest of International Law, 
(Washington, 1943), Vol. VI, 510. 

5. "Germany has been guilty of laying automatic moored 
mines without notice in the North Sea outside territorial 
waters off the British Coast. Consequently the Admiralty 
gave notice that it is their intention to lay mines for the 
better protection of vessels navigating in the North Sea off 
the east coast of England and Scotland. Mines will be laid 
without further notice within the areas defined below." 

Notice from the British Admiralty forwarded by the 
counselor of Embassy at London to the Secretary of 
State, Dec. 27, 1939. Hackworth, G. H., Digest of In- 
ternational Law, (Washington, 1943) , Vol. VI, 510. 

6. "On June 15, 1940 the British Embassy in Washing- 
ton notified the Department of State that certain areas in 
the Mediterranean had been rendered dangerous to ship- 
ping on account of mines." 

Hackworth, G. H., Digest of International Law, 
(Washington, 1943), Vol. VI, 510. 

615960°— 45 5 



60 

7. "On. July 16, 1940 the British Ambassador informed 
the Department of State that, in view of the Italian notice 
that within 30 miles of Allied coasts all merchant vessels 
bound for Allied ports would navigate at their risk and 
peril, the British Government gave notice that all vessels 
navigating within 30 miles of Italian territory in the Medi- 
terranean would do so at their risk and peril." 

Hackworth, G. H., Digest of International Law, 
(Washington, 1943), Vol. VI, 510. 

8. "Whereas section 3 of the joint resolution of Congress 
approved November 4, 1939, provides as follows : 

" c (a) Whenever the President shall have issued a procla- 
mation under the authority of section 1 (a), and he shall 
thereafter find that the protection of citizens of the United 
States so requires, he shall, by proclamation, define combat 
areas, and thereafter it shall be unlawful, except under such 
rules and regulations as may be prescribed, for any citizen 
of the United States or any American vessel to proceed into 
or through any such combat area. The combat areas so 
defined may be made to apply to surface vessels or air- 
craft, or both." 

"Now, therefore, I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of 
the United States of America, acting under and by virtue 
of the authority conferred on me by the said joint resolu- 
tion, do hereby find that the protection of citizens of the 
United States requires that there be defined a combat area 
through or into which it shall be unlawful, except under 
such rules and regulations as may be prescribed, for any 
citizen of the United States or any American vessel, 
whether a surface vessel or an aircraft, to proceed." 

"And I do hereby define such combat area as follows:" 

All navigable waters between the north coast of Spain 
and the coast of Norway. 

Proclamation Defining Combat Areas Nov. 4, 1939. 
United States Naval AVar College, International Law 
Situations, 1939, 147-8. 

9. On June 11, 1940, President Roosevelt extended the 
Atlantic combat zone to include all navigable waters adja- 
cent to the shores of Portugal, Spain, and the northwest 
coast of Africa. The Mediterranean was also declared a 



61 

combat zone. A new combat zone was established off the 
coast of Italian Somaliland. 

United States Naval War College International Law 
Documents, 1940, 24-27. 

10. "While some countries like the United States and 
Argentina long ago have declared the waters surrounding 
the British Isles a war zone and have forbidden their ships, 
airplanes and citizens to enter these dangerous zones, other 
countries have not yet taken the same step. 

"Germany, having repeatedly warned these States not to 
send their ships into the waters around the British Isles, 
has now again requested, in a note, these governments to 
forbid their ships from entering the Anglo-German war 
zones. It is in the interest of these States themselves to 
accede this German request as soon as possible. 

"The Reich Government wishes to emphasize the follow- 
ing fact: The naval war in the waters around the British 
Isles is in full progress. 

"The whole area has been mined. 

"German planes attack every vessel. Any neutral ship 
which in the future enters these waters is liable to be 
destroyed." 

German declaration. New York Times, Aug. 18, 
1940. United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1940, 49-50. 

11. The German government defined the "total blockade" 
area, including the waters bordering on France and Belgium 
and the waters surrounding the British Isles. 

From the New York Times, August 19, 1941. 
United States Naval War College, International Law 
Documents, 1940, 51. 

12. "Airplanes belonging to Pan American Airways, In- 
corporated, and American citizens, members of the crew or 
passengers, travelling thereon, when proceeding between 
Lisbon and African ports south of 30 north latitude, may 
henceforth proceed into and through that portion of the 
combat area defined by the President in his proclamation 
numbered 2410, of June 11, 1940, which is bounded as 
follows :" 



62 

Federal Register, Vol. V, 2209. United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 1940, 102. 

13. "The Hitler government, in defiance of the laws of the 
sea, in defiance of the recognized rights of all other nations, 
has presumed to declare, on paper, that great areas of the 
seas, even including a vast expanse lying in the Western 
Hemisphere, are to be closed and that no ships may enter 
them for any purpose, except at peril of being sunk. Actu- 
ally they are sinking ships at will and without warning in 
widely separated areas both within and far outside of these 
far-flung pretended zones." 

Address by the President, Sept. 11, 1941. United 
States Naval War College, International Law Docu- 
ments, 1941, 17. 

14. "Generation after generation, America has battled for 
the general policy of the freedom of the seas. That policy is 
a very simple one — but a basic, fundamental one. It means 
that no nation has the right to make the broad oceans of the 
world, at great distances from the actual theater of land war, 
unsafe for the commerce of others." 

Address by the President, Sept. 11, 1941. United 
States Naval War College, International Law Docu- 
ments, 1941, 19. 

15. "As a result of the entry into the war of the United 
States of America and the development which naval warfare 
has undergone off the American east coast, the zone of opera- 
tion in which fighting may be expected has been extended to 
the American coast. 

"Every ship which enters this zone after June 26, 1942, 
will expose itself to destruction. 

"The German Government, therefore, warns all ships 
against navigating in this danger zone, which has been de- 
marcated as follows : 

(including most of the Atlantic Ocean) 

"Such an extension of the realm of operations on the part 
of the German Navy is more than an announcement on paper. 
That has been proved already beyond a shadow of a doubt 
b}^ the successes achieved by German submarines in American 
waters." 



63 

Berlin radio broadcast recorded by the Columbia 
Broadcasting Company. New York Times, June 14, 
1942. United States Naval War College, International 
Law Documents, 1941, 158. 

The British Admiralty on February 15, 1944 de- 
clared a vast additional area of 150,000 square 
miles " dangerous 7 ' to shipping. This area in- 
cluded practically the entire Bay of Biscay and also 
blocks the southern end of St. George's Channel, 
which runs between Ireland and Wales. Any ves- 
sel entering this area, except with the permission of 
the British authorities, does so at her own peril. 



IV, Defense Areas 

Defense areas unlike war zones are based upon 
the right of a state to exercise jurisdiction for spe- 
cific purposes, such as defense, revenue, etc., over 
waters adjacent to its coast. These areas are, con- 
sequently, established in waters near the home shore 
instead of near the shores of the enemy. Only two 
nations, the United States and Japan, have em- 
ployed defense areas. As yet, the right of estab- 
lishing such defense areas has not been questioned. 

1. "Article 1. In case of war or emergency, the minister of 
the Navy may, limiting an area, designate a defense sea area 
under this ordinance. The designation, or revocation, of 
such defense sea area shall be advertised by the minister of 
the Navy." 

"Article 3. In, the defense sea area, the ingress and egress 
and passage of any vessels other than those belonging to the 
Army or Navy are prohibited from sunrise to sunrise." 

"Article 5. All vessels which enter, leave, pass through, 
or anchor in a defense sea area shall obey the direction of 
the commander in chief of the naval station, or the comman- 
dant of the secondary naval station, concerned." 

"Article 6. The commander in chief of a naval station, 
or the commandant of a secondary naval station, may, when 
he thinks necessary, forbid or limit within a defense sea area 
fishing, taking of seaweeds, or any other act considered to 
interfere with military operations." 

"Article 8. Any vessel which has transgressed this ordi- 
nance or orders issued under this ordinance, may be ordered 
to leave the defense area by a route which shall be desig- 
nated. 

"Regarding vessels which do not obey the order mentioned 
in the preceding paragraph, armed force may be used when 
necessary." 

64 



65 

Japanese Imperial Ordinance Regarding Defense Sea 
Areas, (1904). United States Naval War College, In- 
ternational Law Situations, 1912, 122-123. 

2. "Regulations, Japanese strategical areas, 1904-5. — The 
regulations governing movement of vessels within 'strategi- 
cal areas' varied according to the area which was under the 
regulation. The notification of the establishment of these 
areas was made in the Official Gazette. Twelve or more of 
such areas were established ; about bays, as at Tokyo ; about 
islands, as the Pescadores; in the neighborhood of naval 
stations, as Sasebo ; or covering straits, as Tangaru Straits." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1912, 123. 

3. "In several areas the boundaries (Japanese, 1904) seem 
to have run outside the 3 -mile limit and even 10 miles from 
land seems to have been included in some instances." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Situations, 1912,.126. 

4. "Certain areas in the neighborhood of fortifications or 
other points of military importance are sometimes set apart 
as strategic areas and vessels are notified or warned not to 
enter. Such action has been generally approved." 

United States Naval War College, International Law 
Topics and Discussions, 1914, 117. 

5. Whoever shall "willfully, or wantonly violate any 
duly authorized and promulgated order or regulation of the 
President governing persons or vessels within the limits of 
defensive sea areas, which defensive sea areas are hereby 
authorized to be established by order of the President from 
time to time as may be necessary in his discretion for pur- 
poses of national defense, shall be punished, on conviction 
thereof in a district or circuit in which the offense was 
committed, or into which the offender is first brought, by a 
fine of not more than $5,000, or by imprisonment for a term 
not exceeding five years, or by both, in the discretion of the 
court." 

39 Stat. 1194. United States Naval War College, In- 
ternational Law Documents, 162. 

6. On April 5, 1917, President Wilson established 29 de- 
fensive sea areas. One other established later. 



66 

Executive Order Establishing Defensive Sea Areas, 
12 A. J. I. L., (1918), Supp., 13-16, 21. 

7. "II. A vessel desiring to cross a Defensive Sea Area 
shall proceed to the vicinity of the entrance to the proper 
channel, flying her national colors, together with Interna- 
tional Code number and pilot signal, and there await com- 
munication with the Harbor Entrance Patrol. It is ex- 
pressly prohibited for any vessel to enter the limits of a 
Defensive Sea Area otherwise than at a designated entrance 
and after authorization by the Harbor Entrance Patrol." 

"IV. On receiving permission from the Harbor Entrance 
Patrol to enter a Defensive Sea Area, a vessel must comply 
with all instructions as to pilotage and other matters that 
she may receive from proper authority, either before or 
during her passage across the Area; it is understood that 
only upon condition of such compliance is the said permis- 
sion granted." 

"V. No permission will be granted to other than a public 
vessel of the United States to cross a Defensive Sea Area 
between sunset and sunrise, nor during the prevalence of 
weather conditions that render navigation difficult or dan- 
gerous. A vessel arriving off a Defensive Sea Area after 
sunset shall anchor or lie-to at a distance of at least a mile 
outside its limits until the following sunrise; vessels dis- 
covered near the limits of the Areas at night may be fired 
upon." 

"IX. Any master of a vessel or other person within the 
vicinity of a Defensive Sea Area who shall violate these 
Regulations, or shall fail to obey an order to stop or heave 
to, or shall perform any act threatening the efficiency of 
mine or other defenses or the safety of navigation, or shall 
take any action inimical to the interests of the United States 
in its prosecution of war, may be detained therein by force of 
arms and renders himself liable to prosecution as provided 
for in the Act * * *." 

Regulations for Carrying into Effect the Executive 
Order of the President Establishing Defensive Sea 
Areas. April 5, 1917. 12 A. J. I. Z., (1918), Supp., 
16-18. 

8. On December 11, 1941, President Roosevelt established 
8 defensive sea areas. 



67 

Executive Order, Dec. 11, 1941. United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 1941, 83-88. 

9. "A vessel not proceeding under United States naval or 
other United States authorized supervision shall not enter or 
navigate the waters of any of the defensive sea areas estab- 
lished hereby except during daylight, when good visibility 
conditions prevail, and then only after specific permission 
has been obtained. Advance arrangements for entry into or 
navigation through or within any of the said defensive sea 
areas must be made, preferably by application at the appro- 
priate United States Naval District Headquarters, in ad- 
vance of sailing, or by radio or visual communication on 
approaching the seaward limits of the area." 

"A vessel entering or navigating the waters of any of the 
said defensive sea areas does so at its own risk." 

"A vessel may expect supervision of its movements within 
any of the said defensive sea areas, either through surface 
craft or aircraft. Such controlling surface craft and air- 
craft shall be identified by a prominent display of the union 
jack." 

"Any master of a vessel or other person within any of the 
said defensive sea areas, who shall disregard these regula- 
tions, or shall fail to obey an order of United States naval 
authority to stop or heave to, or shall perform any act 
threatening the efficiency of mine or other defenses or the 
safety of navigation, or shall take any action inimical to 
the interests of the United States, may be detained therein 
by force of arms and renders himself liable to attack by the 
armed forces of the United States, and liable to prosecution 
as provided in Section 44 of the Criminal Code * * *." 
Executive Order, Dec. 11, 1941. United States Naval 
War College, International Law Documents, 89-90. 

10. By the end of 1943 well over 40 defensive sea areas 
had been established by President Roosevelt. 

The greatest extension beyond the three-mile limit for 
defensive purposes was in the Southeastern Alaska Mari- 
time Control Area where the area extended about 53 miles 
beyond the three-mile limit. 

United States Naval War College, Defensive Sm 
Area Charts, Feb. 22, 1944, 1. 



V. Agreement With China Regarding Jurisdic- 
tion Over Criminal Offenses by Armed Forces 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 217, Aug. 21, 1943) 

The Secretary of State has received from the 
American Embassy at Chungking copies of the 
notes, in English and Chinese, which were ex- 
changed on May 21, 1943 between Mr. George 
Atcheson, Jr., American Charge d 'Affaires ad 
interim, and Dr. Kuo-Cheng Wu, Political Vice 
Minister in Charge of Ministerial Affairs, Chinese 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, effecting an agree- 
ment between the United States and China re- 
garding the jurisdiction over criminal offenses 
which may be committed by the armed forces of 
either country in territory of the other country. 
The Government of the United States previously 
had entered into arrangements of a similar char- 
acter with a number of other countries. 

According to information received in the De- 
partment of State from the American Embassy at 
Chungking the following statement was made by 
the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in con- 
nection with the publication in China of the notes 
of May 21, 1943: 

"According to international law and international prac- 
tice, when the armed forces of the Allied nations are sta- 
tioned in the territory of another for the purpose of under- 
taking joint military operations, exclusive criminal jurisdic- 
tion over members of such forces is exercised by the mili- 
tary or naval courts or authorities of the country to which 
such forces belong. This practice was followed in the last 
world war. Last year, when the United States despatched 

68 



69 

armed forces to territories under British jurisdiction, the 
United States and the British Governments reached an 
agreement whereby the armed forces of the United States 
stationed in British territory are formally placed under the 
exclusive jurisdiction of the United States military or 
naval courts or authorities in respect of criminal offenses. 

"Inasmuch as all nationals of the United States in China, 
including those belonging to its armed forces, enjoyed ex- 
traterritorial rights, there was no need for any special reg- 
ulations. However, as the exchange of ratifications of the 
new Sino-American treaty has already taken place, United 
States nationals in China are henceforth subject to our 
jurisdiction. Therefore, the necessity has been felt that the 
question of criminal jurisdiction over members of the armed 
forces of the United States in China should be clearly 
defined. 

"Accordingly, the Political Vice Minister in charge of 
Ministerial Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dr. 
K. C. Wu, on behalf of the Chinese Government, and the 
Charge d'Affaires ad interim, of the United States, Mr. 
George Atcheson, on behalf of the United States Govern- 
ment, have reached an understanding, on the basis of equal- 
ity and reciprocity which has been placed on record by an 
exchange of notes on May 21, 1943, to the effect that juris- 
diction over criminal offenses committed by members of the 
armed forces of the United States in China shall be exclu- 
sively exercised by the service courts and the military and 
naval authorities of the United States, and that the United 
States Government shall make like arrangements to ensure 
to such Chinese forces as may be stationed in territory 
under United States jurisdiction a position corresponding 
to that of the United States forces in China." 

The texts in English of the notes exchanged on 
May 21, 1943, are as follows : 



70 

The American Charge at Chungking to the Chinese 
Political Vice Minister in Charge of Ministerial 
Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 

Chungking, May 21, 1943. 
Excellency : 

Confirming the understanding reached in the 
conversations which have taken place in Chung- 
king between representatives of our two Govern- 
ments, I have the honor to inform Your Excel- 
lency that it is the desire of the Government of 
the United States that the service courts and 
authorities of its military and naval forces shall 
during the continuance of the present conflict 
against our common enemies exercise exclusive 
jurisdiction over criminal offenses which may be 
committed in China by members of such forces. 

If cases arise in which for special reasons the 
service authorities of the Government of the 
United States may : prefer not to exercise the 
above jurisdiction, it is proposed that in any 
such case a written statement to that effect shall 
be sent to the Chinese Government through diplo- 
matic channels, in which event it would be open 
to the Chinese authorities to assume jurisdiction. 

Assurance is given that the service courts and 
authorities of the United States forces in China 
will be willing and able to try, and on conviction 
to punish, all criminal offenses which members of 
the United States forces may be alleged on suffi- 
cient evidence to have committed in China and 
that the United States authorities will be willing 
in principle to investigate and deal appropriately 
with any alleged criminal offenses committed by 
such forces in China which may be brought to 



71 

their attention by the competent Chinese authori- 
ties or which the United States authorities may 
find have taken place. 

Insofar as may be . compatible with military 
security, the service authorities of the United 
States will conduct the trial of any member of 
the United States forces for an offense against 
a member of the civilian population promptly in 
open court in China and within a reasonable dis- 
tance from the place where the offense is alleged 
to have been committed so that witnesses may not 
be required to travel great distances to attend the 
trial. 

The competent United States authorities will 
be prepared to cooperate with the authorities of 
China in setting up a satisfactory procedure for 
affording such mutual assistance as may be re- 
quired in making investigations and collecting 
evidence with respect to offenses alleged to have 
been committed by members of the armed forces 
of the United States. As a general rule it would 
probably be desirable that preliminary action 
should be taken by the Chinese authorities on be- 
half of the United States authorities where the 
witnesses or other persons from whom it is de- 
sired to obtain testimony are not members of the 
United States forces. In prosecutions in Chinese 
courts of persons who are not members of the 
United States forces, but where members of such 
forces are in any way concerned, the service 
authorities of the United States will be glad to 
render such assistance as is possible in obtaining 
testimony of members of such forces or in making- 
appropriate investigations. 



72 

Inasmuch as the interests of our common cause 
will best be served by provision that the foregoing 
arrangement may be placed on a reciprocal basis, 
the Government of the United States will be ready 
to make like arrangements to ensure to such Chi- 
nese forces as may be stationed in territory under 
United States jurisdiction a position correspond- 
ing to that of the United States forces in China. 

It is proposed that the foregoing arrangement 
shall be in effect during the present war and for a 
period of six months thereafter. 

If the above arrangement is acceptable to the 
Chinese Government, this note and the reply 
thereto accepting the provisions outlined shall be 
regarded as placing on record the understanding 
between our two Governments. 

I avail [etc.] George Atcheson, Jr. 



VI. Recognition of the French Committee of 



Statement by the President 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 218, Aug. 28, 1943) 

The Government of the United States desires 
again to make clear its purpose of cooperating 
with all patriotic Frenchmen, looking to the liber- 
ation of the French people and French territories 
from the oppressions of the enemy. 

The Government of the United States, accord- 
ingly, welcomes the establishment of the French 
Committee of National Liberation. It is our ex- 
pectation that the Committee will function on the 
principle of collective responsibility of all its 
members for the active prosecution of the war. 

In view of the paramount importance of the 
common war effort, the relationship with the 
French Committee of National Liberation must 
continue to be subject to the military require- 
ments of the Allied commanders. 

The Government of the United States takes 
note, with sympathy, of the desire of the Com- 
mittee to be regarded as the body qualified to 
insure the administration and defense of French 
interests. The extent to which it may be possi- 
ble to give effect to this desire must, however, 
be reserved for consideration in each case as it 
arises. 

On these understandings the Government of 
the United States recognizes the French Com- 
mittee of National Liberation as administering 

73 



74 

those French overseas territories which acknowl- 
edge its authority. 

This statement does not constitute recogni- 
tion of a government of France or of the French 
Empire by the Government of the United States. 

It does constitute recognition of the French 
Committee of National Liberation as functioning 
within specific limitations during the war. Later 
on the people of France, in a free and untram- 
meled manner, will proceed in due course to select 
their own government and their own officials to 
administer it. 

The Government of the United States welcomes 
the Committee's expressed determination to con- 
tinue the common struggle in close cooperation 
with all the Allies until French soil is freed from 
its invaders and until victory is complete over 
all enemy powers. 

May the restoration of France come with the 
utmost speed. 



VII. Agreement for United Nations Relief and 
Rehabilitation Administration 

Draft of Sept. 20, 1943 

(The New York Times, September 24, 1943) 

The governments or authorities whose duly au- 
thorized representatives have subscribed hereto^ 

Being United Nations or being associated with 
the United Nations in this war, 

Being determined that immediately upon the 
liberation of any area by the armed forces of the 
United Nations or as a consequence of retreat of 
the enemy the population thereof shall receive aid 
and relief from their sufferings, food, clothing 
and shelter, aid in the prevention of pestilence 
and in the recovery of the health of the people, 
and that preparation and arrangements shall be 
made for the return of prisoners and exiles to 
their homes and for assistance in the resumption, 
of urgently needed agricultural and industrial 
production and the restoration of essential serv- 
ices, 

Have agreed as follows: 

ARTICLE I 

There is hereby established the United Nations 
Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. 

1. The Administration shall have power to ac- 
quire, hold and convey property, to enter into 
contracts and undertake obligations, to designate 
or create agencies and to review the activities of 
agencies so created, to manage undertakings and 

615960°— 45 6 75 



76 

in general to perform any legal act appropriate 
to its objects and purposes. 

2. Subject to the provision of Article VII, the 
purposes and functions of the Administration 
shall be as follows : 

(a) To plan, coordinate, administer or arrange 
for the administration of measures for the relief 
of victims of war in any area under the control 
of any of the United Nations through the provi- 
sion of food, fuel, clothing, shelter and other basic 
necessities, medical and other essential services; 
and to facilitate in such areas, so far as necessary 
to the adequate provision of relief, the production 
and transportation of these articles and the fur- 
nishing of these services. The form of activities 
of the Administration within the territory of a 
member government wherein that government ex- 
ercises administrative authority and the responsi- 
bility to be assumed by the member government 
for carrying out measures planned by the Admin- 
istration therein shall be determined after consul- 
tation with and with the consent of the member 
government. 

(b) To formulate and recommend measures for 
individual or joint action by any or all of the 
member governments for the coordination of pur- 
chasing, the use of ships and other procurement 
activities in the period following the cessation of 
hostilities, with a view to integrating the plans and 
activities of the Administration with the total 
movement of supplies, and for the purpose of 
achieving an equitable distribution of available 
supplies. The Administration may administer 
such coordination measures as may be author- 
ized by the member governments concerned. 



77 

(c) To study, formulate and recommend for 
individual or joint action by any or all of the 
member governments measures with respect to 
such related matters, arising out of its experience 
in planning and performing the work of relief 
and rehabilitation, as may be proposed by any 
of the member governments. Such proposals shall 
be studied and recommendations formulated if the 
proposals are supported by a vote of the Council, 
and the recommendations shall be referred to any 
or all of the member governments for individual 
or joint action if approved by unanimous vote of 
the Central Committee and by vote of the Council. 

ARTICLE II 

Membership 

The members of the United Nations Relief and 
Rehabilitation Administration shall be the govern- 
ments or authorities signatory hereto and such 
other governments or authorities as may upon ap- 
plication for membership be admitted thereto by 
action of the Council. The Council may, if it 
desires, authorize the Central Committee to accept 
new members between sessions of the Council. 

Wherever the term " member government" is 
used in this Agreement it shall be construed to 
mean a member of the Administration, whether a 
government or an authority. 

ARTICLE III 
The Council 

1. Each member government shall name one 
representative, and such alternates as may be 
necessary, upon the Council of the United Nations 



78 

Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, which 
shall be the policy-making body of the Adminis- 
tration. The Council shall, for each of its ses- 
sions, select one of its members to preside at the 
session. The Council shall determine its own 
rules of procedure. Unless otherwise provided 
by the Agreement or by action of the Council, the 
Council shall vote by simple majority. 

2. The Council shall be convened in regular ses- 
sion not less than twice a year by the central 
committee. It may be convened in special session 
whenever the Central Committee shall deem neces- 
sary, and shall be convened within thirty days 
after request therefor by one-third of the members 
of the Council. 

3. The Central Committee of the Council shall 
consist of the representatives of China, the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United King- 
dom and the United States of America, with the 
Director General presiding, without vote. Be- 
tween sessions of the Council it shall, when neces- 
sary, make policy decisions of an emergency na- 
ture. All such decisions shall be recorded in the 
minutes of the Central Committee which shall be 
communicated promptly to each member govern- 
ment. Such decisions shall be open to reconsider- 
ation by the Council at any regular session or at 
any special session called in accordance with Arti- 
cle III, paragraph 2. The Central Committee 
shall invite the participation of the representatives 
of any member government at those of its meet- 
ings at which action of special interest to such 
government is discussed. It shall invite the par- 
ticipation of the representative serving as Chair- 



79 

man of the Committee on Supplies of the Council 
at those of its meetings at which policies affecting 
the provision of supplies are discussed. 

4. The Committee on Supplies of the Council 
shall consist of the members of the Council, or 
their alternates, representing those member gov- 
ernments likely to be principal suppliers of mate- 
rials for relief and rehabilitation. The members 
shall be appointed by the Council, and the Council 
may authorize the Central Committee to make 
emergency appointments between sessions of the 
Council, such appointments to continue until the 
next session of the Council. The Committee on 
Supplies shall consider, formulate and recommend 
to the Council and the Central Committee policies 
designed to assure the provision of required sup- 
plies. The Central Committee shall from time to 
time meet with the Committee on Supplies to re- 
view policy matters affecting supplies. 

5. The Committee of the Council for Europe 
shall consist of all the members of the Council, or 
their alternates, representing member govern- 
ments of territories within the European area, 
and such other members of the Council, represent- 
ing other governments directly concerned with the 
problems of relief and rehabilitation in the Euro- 
pean area, as shall be appointed by the Council; 
the Council may authorize the Central Committee 
to make these appointments in cases of emergency 
between sessions of the Council, such appoint- 
ments to continue until the next session of the 
Council. The Committee of the Council for the 
Ear East shall consist of all the members of the 
Council, or their alternates, representing member 



80 

governments of territories within the Far Eastern 
area, and such other members of the Council rep- 
resenting other governments directly concerned 
with the problems of relief and rehabilitation in 
the Par Eastern area as shall be appointed by the 
Council; the Council may authorize the Central 
Committee to make these appointments in cases 
of emergency between sessions of the Council, such 
appointments to continue until the next session of 
the Council. The regional committees shall nor- 
mally meet within their respective areas. They 
shall consider and recommend to the Council and 
the Central Committee policies with respect to 
relief and rehabilitation within their respective 
areas. The Committee of the Council for Europe 
shall replace the Inter-Allied Committee on Euro- 
pean Post- War Relief established in London on 
Sept. 24, 1941, and the records of the latter shall 
be made available to the Committee for Europe. 

6. The Council shall establish .such other stand- 
ing regional committees as it shall consider desir- 
able, the functions of such committees and the 
method of appointing their members being identi- 
cal to that provided in paragraph 5 of this article 
with respect to the Committees of the Council for 
Europe and for the Far East. The Council shall 
also establish such other standing committees as it 
considers desirable to advise it, and, in intervals 
between sessions of the Council, to advise the Cen- 
tral Committee. For such technical standing 
committees as may be established, in respect of 
particular problems such as nutrition, health, agri- 
culture, transport, repatriation and finance, the 
members may be members of the Council or alter- 
nates nominated by them because of special com- 



81 

petence in their respective fields of work. The 
members shall be appointed by the Council, and 
the Council may authorize the Central Committee 
to make emergency appointments between sessions 
of the Council, such appointments to continue un- 
til the next session of the Council. Should a 
regional committee so desire, subcommittees of 
the technical standing committees shall be estab- 
lished by the technical committees in consultation 
with the regional committees, to advise the re- 
gional committees. 

7. The travel and other expenses of members of 
the Council and of members of its committees shall 
be borne by the Governments which they repre- 
sent. 

8. All reports and recommendations of com- 
mittees of the Council shall be transmitted to the 
Director General for distribution to the Council 
and the Central Committee by the secretariat of 
the Council established under the provisions of 
Article IV, Paragraph 4. 

ARTICLE IV 
The Director General 

1. The executive authority of the United Na- 
tions Relief and Rehabilitation Administration 
shall be in the Director General, who shall be ap- 
pointed by the Council on the nomination by 
unanimous vote of the Central Committee. The 
Director General may be removed by the Council 
on recommendation, by unanimous vote, of the 
Central Committee. 

2. The Director General shall have full power 
and authority for carrying out relief operations 
contemplated by Article I, paragraph 2 (a), 



82 

within the limits of available resources and the 
broad policies determined by the Council or its 
central committee. Immediately upon taking of- 
fice he shall in conjunction with the military and 
other appropriate authorities of the United Na- 
tions prepare plans for the emergency relief of 
the civilian population in any area occupied by 
the armed forces of any of the United Nations, 
arrange for the procurement and assembly of the 
necessary supplies and create or select the emer- 
gency organization required for this purpose. In 
arranging for the procurement, transporation and 
distribution of supplies and services, he and his 
representatives shall consult and collaborate with 
the appropriate authorities of the United Nations 
and shall, wherever practicable, use the facilities 
made available by such authorities. Foreign vol- 
untary relief agencies may not engage in activity 
in any area receiving relief from the Administra- 
tion without the consent and unless subject to the 
regulation of the Director General. The powers 
and duties of the Director General are subject to 
the limitations of Article VII. 

3. The Director General shall also be responsi- 
ble for the organization and direction of the func- 
tions contemplated by Article I, paragraphs 2 (b) 
and 2 (c). 

4. The Director General shall appoint such 
Deputy Directors General, officers, expert person- 
nel, and staff at his headquarters and elsewhere, 
including field missions, as he shall find necessary, 
and he may delegate to them such of his powers 
as he may deem appropriate. The Director Gen- 
eral, or upon his authorization the Deputy Direc- 
tors General, shall supply such secretariat and 



83 

other staff and facilities as shall be required by 
the Council and its committees, including the 
regional committees and subcommittees. Such 
Deputy Directors General as shall be assigned 
special functions within a region shall attend 
meetings of the regional standing committee 
whenever possible and shall keep it advised on the 
progress of the relief and rehabilitation program 
within the region. 

5. The Director General shall make periodic 
reports to the Central Committee and to the Coun- 
cil covering the progress of the Administration's 
activities. The reports shall be made public ex- 
cept for such portions as the Central Committee 
may consider it necessary, in the interest of the 
United Nations, to keep confidential ; if a report 
affects the interests of a member government in 
such a way as to render it questionable whether it 
should be published, such government shall have 
an opportunity of expressing its views on the 
question of publication. The Director General 
shall also arrange to have prepared periodic re- 
ports covering the activities of the Administration 
within each region, and he shall transmit such 
reports with his comments thereon to the Coun- 
cil, the Central Committee and the respective 
regional committees. 

ARTICLE V 
Supplies and Resources 

1. Insofar as its appropriate constitutional 
bodies shall authorize, each member government 
will contribute to the support of the Administra- 
tion in order to accomplish the purpose of Arti- 
cle I, Paragraph 2 (a). The amount and char- 



84 

acter of the contributions of each member govern- 
ment under this provision will be determined 
from time to time by its appropriate constitu- 
tional bodies. All such contributions received by 
the Administration shall be accounted for. 

2. The supplies and resources made available 
by the member governments shall be kept in re- 
view in relation to prospective requirements by 
the Director General, who shall initiate action 
with the member governments with a view to as- 
suring such additional supplies and resources as 
may be required. 

3. All purchases by any of the member govern- 
ments, to be made outside their own territories 
during the war for relief or rehabilitation pur- 
poses, shall be made only after consultation with 
the Director General, and shall, so far as prac- 
ticable, be carried out through the appropriate 
United Nations agency. 

ARTICLE VI 
Administrative Expenses 

The Director General shall submit to the Coun- 
cil an annual budget, and from time to time such 
supplementary budgets as may be required, cov- 
ering the necessary administrative expenses of 
the Administration. Upon approval of a budget 
by the Council the total amount approved shall 
be allocated to the member Governments in pro- 
portions to be determined by the Council. Each 
member Government undertakes, subject to the 
requirements of its constitutional procedure, to 
contribute to the Administration promptly its 
share of the administrative expenses so deter- 
mined. 



85 
ARTICLE VII 

Notwithstanding any other provision herein 
contained, while hostilities or other military 
necessities exist in any area, the Administration 
and its Director General shall not undertake 
activities therein without the consent of the 
military command of that area, and unless sub- 
ject to such control as the command may find 
necessary. The determination that such hostil- 
ities or military necessities exist in any area shall 
be made by its military commander. 

ARTICLE VIII 
Amendment 

The provisions of this agreement may be 
amended as follows: 

a. Amendments involving new obligations for 
member Governments shall require the approval 
of the Council by a two-thirds vote and shall take 
effect for each member Government on accept- 
ance by it; 

b. Amendments involving modification of Arti- 
cle III or Article IV shall take effect on adoption 
by the Council by a two-thirds vote, including 
the votes of all the members of the Central 
Committee ; 

c. Other amendments shall take effect on 
adoption by the Council by a two-thirds vote. 

ARTICLE IX 
Entry Into Force 

This agreement shall enter into force with re- 
spect to each signatory on the date when the 



86 

agreement is signed by that signatory, unless oth- 
erwise specified by such signatory. 

ARTICLE X 
Withdrawal 

Any member Government may give notice of 
withdrawal from the Administration at any time 
after the expiration of six months from the entry 
into force of the agreement for that Government. 
Such notice shall take effect twelve months after 
the date of its communication to the Director 
General, subject to the member Government hav- 
ing met by that time all financial, supply or other 
material obligations accepted or undertaken by it* 



VIII. Churchill Statement on the Azores 

(The New York Times, October 13, 1943) 

The text of Prime Minister Churchill's state- 
ment in the House of Commons follows: 

I have an announcement to make to the House 
arising out of the treaty signed between this 
country and Portugal in the year 1373 between 
His Majesty King Edward III and King Ferdi- 
nand and Queen Eleanor of Portugal. This 
treaty was reinforced in various forms by treaties 
of 1386, 1642, 1654, 1660, 1661, 1703, 1815 and in a 
secret declaration of 1899. 

In more modern times the validity of old 
treaties was recognized in treaties of arbitration 
concluded with Portugal in 1904 and in 1914. 
Article 1 of the Treaty of 1373 runs as follows : 

"In the first place we settle and covenant that 
they shall be from this day forward * * * true 
and faithful friends; they shall henceforth recip- 
rocally be friends to friends and enemies to 
enemies and shall assist, maintain, and uphold 
each other mutually by sea and by land against 
all men that may live or die." 

This engagement has lasted now for over 600 
years and that is without parallel in world his- 
tory. I have now to announce the latest applica- 
tion of these instruments. At the outset of the 
war the Protugue.se Government in full agree- 
ment with His Majesty's Government in the 
United Kingdom adopted a policy of neutrality 

87 



88 

with the view to preventing the war from spread- 
ing into the Iberian Peninsula. 

The Portuguese Government have, however, fre- 
quently stated and most recently in Dr. Salazar's 
speech of April 27, that the above policy is in no 
way inconsistent with the Anglo-Portuguese alli- 
ance which was reaffirmed by the Portuguese Gov- 
ernment in the early days of the war. His Maj- 
esty's Governments in the United Kingdom, bas- 
ing themselves upon this ancient alliance, have 
now requested the Portuguese Government to ac- 
cord them certain facilities in the Azores which 
will enable better protection to be provided for 
merchant shipping in the Atlantic. 

The Portuguese Government have agreed to 
grant this request and arrangements which enter 
into force immediately have been concluded be- 
tween the two governments regarding first, the 
conditions governing the use of the above facilities 
by His Majesty's Government in the United King- 
dom and, secondly, British assistance in furnish- 
ing essential material and supplies for the Portu- 
guese armed forces and for the maintenance of 
Portugal's national economy. 

The agreement concerning the use of facilities 
in the Azores is of a temporary nature only and in 
no way prejudices the maintenance of Portuguese 
sovereignty over Portuguese territory. All Brit- 
ish forces will be withdrawn from the Azores at 
the end of hostilities. Nothing in this agreement 
affects the continued desire of the Portuguese 
Government, with which His Majesty's Govern- 
ment have declared themselves in sympathy, to 
continue their policy of neutrality on the Euro- 



89 

pean mainland and thus to maintain a zone of 
peace in the Iberian Peninsula. 

In the view of His Majesty's Government this 
agreement should give new life and vigor to the 
alliance which has so long existed between the 
United Kingdom and Portugal to their mutual 
advantage. It not only confirms and strengthens 
political guarantees resulting from treaties of al- 
liance, but also affords new proof of Anglo-Por- 
tuguese friendship and provides additional 
guarantees for the development of this friendship 
in the future. 

On the conclusion of these negotiations the 
Foreign Secretary, who has, I think, conducted 
them with the very greatest skill and patience, has 
exchanged most cordial messages with the Portu- 
guese President of the Council. 

In his message the Foreign Secretary affirmed 
his conviction that the facilities now granted by 
the Portuguese Government will greatly contrib- 
ute to the effective defense of our shipping and 
thus will prove an important factor in shortening 
the war. He added that the agreement would give 
fresh vitality to the ancient alliance and enhance 
the close and friendly relations which have so long 
subsisted between Portugal and Great Britain. 

In replying to this message Dr. Salazar stated 
that he shared the hope that the facilities granted 
by Portugal to her ally would help to bring about 
greater safety for shipping in the Atlantic; that 
he trusted that this new proof of Portugal's 
loyalty to her traditions would fortify the secular 
alliance and serve to draw still closer the bonds 
of friendship uniting the two peoples. 



90 

I take this opportunity of placing on record the 
appreciation of His Majesty's Government, which 
I have no doubt is shared by Parliament and the 
British nation, of the attitude of the Portuguese 
Government, whose loyalty to their British ally 
never wavered in the darkest hours of the war. 

Texts of the messages exchanged by Foreign 
Secretary Anthony Eden and Dr. Antonio de 
Oliveira Salazar, Premier of Portugal, on the oc- 
casion of the granting of facilities to Britain in 
the Azores: 

MR. EDEN'S MESSAGE 

I ask Your Excellency to accept my best wishes 
on the entry into force of agreements between 
His Majesty's Government in the United King- 
dom and the Portuguese Government covering the 
use by British forces of facilities in the Azores. 

I am convinced that these facilities will greatly 
contribute to the effective defense of our shipping 
and thus prove an important factor in shortening 
the war. 

The agreement will give fresh vitality to our an- 
cient alliance and enhance the close and friendly 
relations which ' have so long subsisted between 
Portugal and Great Britain. 

DE. SALAZAR'S REPLY 

I thank Your Excellency for your kind message 
on the occasion of the entry into force of facilities 
granted in the Azores to British forces in virtue 
of an agreement concluded between the Portuguese 
and British Governments, based on the alliance 
between the two countries. 



91 

I share Your Excellency's hope that the facili- 
ties granted by Portugal to her ally will help to 
bring about greater safety for shipping in the 
Atlantic and 'I trust that this new proof of Por- 
tugal's loyalty to her traditions will fortify the 
secular alliance and serve to draw still closer the 
bonds of friendship uniting our two peoples. ' 



(615960—45- 



IX. Statement by the President of the United 
States, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, 
and the Premier of the Soviet Union on Italy's 
Declaration of War 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 225, October 16, 

1943) 

The 'following joint statement has been issued 
by the President of the United States, the Prime 
Minister of Great Britain, and the Premier of 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, concern- 
ing the 'declaration of war by Italy against Ger- 
many : 

The Governments of Great Britain, the United States 
and the Soviet Union acknowledge the position of the 
Royal Italian Government as stated by Marshal 'Badoglio 
and accept the active cooperation of the Italian nation and 
armed forces as a co-belligerent in the war 'against Ger- 
many. The military events since September eighth and the 
brutal maltreatment by the Germans of the Italian popula- 
tion, culminating in the Italian declaration of war against 
Germany have in fact made Italy a co-belligerent 'and the 
American, British and Soviet Governments will continue to 
work with the Italian Government on that basis. The three 
Governments acknowledge the Italian Government's pledge 
to submit to the will of the Italian people after 'the Ger- 
mans have been driven from Italy, and it is understood 
that nothing can detract from * the absolute and untram- 
melled right of the people of Italy by constitutional means 
to decide on the democratic form of government they will 
eventually ' have. 

The relationship of co-belligerency between the Govern- 
ment of Italy and the United Nations governments cannot 
of itself affect the terms recently signed, which retain 'their 
full force and can only be adjusted by agreement between 
the allied governments in the light 'of the assistance which 
the Italian Government may be able to afford to the 
United Nations' cause. 

92 



X. Statement by President Roosevelt Regarding 
the Puppet Government in the Philippines 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 226, October 23, 

1943) 

On the fourteenth of 'this month a puppet gov- 
ernment was set up in the Philippine Islands with 
Jose P. Laurel, formerly a justice of the Philip- 
pine Supreme Court, as' " president". Jorge Var- 
gas, formerly a member of the Philippine Com- 
monwealth Cabinet, and Benigno Aquino, also 
formerly a member of that Cabinet, were closely 
associated 'with Laurel in this movement. The 
first act of the new puppet regime was to sign a 
military alliance with Japan. The second act was 
a hypocritical appeal for American sympathy 
which was made in fraud and deceit and was de- 
signed to confuse and mislead the Filipino people. 

I wish to make it clear that neither the former 
collaborationist " Philippine Executive Commis- 
sion" nor the present " Philippine 'Republic" has 
the recognition or sympathy of the Government 
of the United States. No act of either body is 
now or ever will be considered lawful or binding 
by this Government. 

The only Philippine government is that estab- 
lished by the people of the Philippines under the 
authorization of the Congress of the United 
States — the Government of the Commonwealth of 
the Philippine Islands. At my request, the prin- 
cipal executive officers of the Commonwealth were 
transferred in 1942 from Corregidor to Wash- 
ington. 

Further, it is our expressed policy that all the 
resources of the United States, both of men and 

93 



94 

materials, shall be employed to drive the treach- 
erous, invading Japanese from the Philippine Is- 
lands, to restore as quickly as possible orderly and 
free democratic processes of government 'in the is- 
lands, and to establish there a truly independent 
Philippine nation. 

Our sympathy goes out to those who remain 
loyal to the United States and the Common- 
wealth — to that great majority of the Filipino 
people who have not been deceived by the promises 
of the enemy and who look forward to 'the day 
when the scheming, perfidious Japanese shall have 
been driven from the Philippines. That day will 
come. 



XL The Tripartite Conference in Moscow 

(Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 228, Nov. 6, 1943) 
Declaration of Four Nations on General Security 

The Governments of the United States of 
America, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union 
and China: 

united in their determination, in accordance 
with the Declaration by the United Nations of 
January 1, 1942, and subsequent declarations, to 
continue hostilities against those Axis powers 
with which they respectively are at war until such 
powers have laid down their arms on the basis of 
unconditional surrender ; 

conscious of their responsibility to secure the 
liberation of themselves and the peoples allied 
with them from the menace of aggression ; 

recognizing the necessity of ensuring a rapid 
and orderly transition from war to peace and of 
establishing and maintaining international peace 
and security with the least diversion of the world's 
human and economic resources for armaments; 

jointly declare: 

1. That their united action, pledged for the 
prosecution of the war against their respective 
enemies, will be continued for the organization 
and maintenance of peace and security. 

2. That those of them at war with a common 
enemy will act together in all matters relating to 
the surrender and disarmament of that enemy. 

95 



96 

3. That they will take all measures deemed by 
them to be necessary to provide against any vio- 
lation of the terms imposed upon the enemy. 

4. That they recognize the necessity of estab- 
lishing at the earliest practicable date a general 
international organization, based on the prin- 
ciple of the sovereign equality of all peace-lov- 
ing states, and open to membership by all such 
states, large and small, for the maintenance of 
international peace and security. 

5. That for the purpose of maintaining inter- 
national peace and security pending the re-estab- 
lishment of law and order and the inauguration 
of a system of general security, they will consult 
with one another and as occasion requires with 
other members of the United Nations with a view 
to joint action on behalf of the community of 
nations. 

6. That after the termination of hostilities they 
will not employ their military forces within the 
territories of other states except for the pur- 
poses envisaged in this declaration and after joint 
consultation. 

7. That they will confer and co-operate with one 
another and with other members of the United 
Nations to bring about a practicable general agree- 
ment with respect to the regulation of armaments 
in the post-war period. 

V. Molotov 
Anthony Eden 
Coedell Hull 

POO PlNG-SHETJNG 

Moscow, 

30th October, 1943. 



97 

Declaration Regarding Italy 

The Foreign Secretaries of the United States 
of America, the United Kingdom arid the Soviet 
Union have established that their three Govern- 
ments are in complete agreement that Allied pol- 
icy towards Italy must be based upon the funda- 
mental principle that Fascism and all its evil in- 
fluences and emanations shall be utterly destroyed 
and that the Italian people shall be given every 
opportunity to establish governmental and other 
institutions based upon democratic principles. 

The Foreign Secretaries of the United States 
of America and the United Kingdom declare that 
the action of their Governments from the incep- 
tion of the invasion of Italian territory, insofar 
as paramount military requirements have per- 
mitted, has been based upon this policy. 

In the furtherance of this policy in the future 
the Foreign Secretaries of the three Govern- 
ments are agreed that the following measures are 
important and should be put into effect: 

1. It is essential that the Italian Government 
should be made more democratic by the intro- 
duction of representatives of those sections of 
the Italian people who have always opposed 
Fascism. 

2. Freedom of speech, of religious worship, 
of political belief, of the press and of public 
meeting shall be restored in full measure to the 
Italian people, who shall also be entitled to form 
anti-Fascist political groups. 

3. All institutions and organizations created by 
the Fascist regime shall be suppressed. 



98 

4. All Fascist or pro-Fascist elements shall be 
removed from the administration and from 
the institutions and organizations of a public 
character. 

5. All political prisoners of the Fascist regime 
shall be released and accorded a full amnesty. 

6. Democratic organs of local government shall 
be created. 

7. Fascist chiefs and other persons known or 
suspected to be war criminals shall be arrested 
and handed over to justice. 

In making this declaration the three Foreign 
Secretaries recognize that so long as active mili- 
tary operations continue in Italy the time at 
which* it is possible to give full effect to the prin- 
ciples set out above will be determined by the 
Commander-in-Chief on the basis of instructions 
received through the Combined Chiefs of Staff. 
The three Governments, parties to this declaration 
will at the request of any one of them consult 
on this matter. 

It is further understood that nothing in this 
resolution is to operate against the right of the 
Italian people ultimately to choose their own 
form of government. 

Declaration on Austria 

The governments of the United Kingdom, the 
Soviet Union and the United States of America 
are agreed that Austria, the first free country to 
fall a victim to Hitlerite aggression, shall be 
liberated from German domination. 

They regard the annexation imposed upon 
Austria by Germany on March 15, 1938 as null 
and void. They consider themselves as in no 



99 

way bound by any changes effected in Austria 
since that date. They declare that they wish to 
see re-established a free and independent Austria, 
and thereby to open the way for the Austrian 
people themselves, as well as those neighboring 
states which will be faced with similar problems, 
to find that political and economic security which 
is the only basis for lasting peace. 

Austria is reminded, however, that she has a re- 
sponsibility which she cannot evade for participa- 
tion in the war on the side of Hitlerite Germany, 
and that in the final settlement account will in- 
evitably be taken of her own contribution to her 
liberation. 



XII. Conference of President Roosevelt, Gen- 
eralissimo Chiang Kai-shek, and Prime Minis- 
ter Churchill in North Africa 

(Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 232, Dec. 4, 1943) 

President Roosevelt, Generalissimo Chiang Kai- 
shek and Prime Minister Churchill, together with 
their respective military and diplomatic advisers, 
have completed a conference in North Africa. 

The following general statement was issued : 

"The several military missions have agreed 
upon future military operations against Japan. 
The Three Great Allies^ expressed their resolve 
to bring unrelenting pressure against their bru- 
tal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is 
already rising. 

"The Three Great Allies are fighting this war 
to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. 
They covet no gain for themselves and have no 
thought of territorial expansion. It is their pur- 
pose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands 
in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied 
since the beginning of the first World War in 
1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen 
from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, 
and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Re- 
public of China. Japan will also be expelled from 
all other territories which she has taken by 
violence and greed. The aforesaid three great 
powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people 
of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea 
shall become free and independent. 

100 



101 

"With these objects in view the three Allies, in 
harmony with those of the United Nations at war 
with Japan, will continue to persevere in the seri- 
ous and prolonged operations necessary to procure 
the unconditional surrender of Japan.' ' 



XIII. Conference of President Roosevelt, Prime 
Minister Churchill and Premier Stalin at 
Tehran 

(Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 233, Dec. 11, 1943) 
Declaration of the Three Powers 

We — The President of the United States, the 
Prime Minister of Great Britain, and the Pre- 
mier of the Soviet Union, have met these four 
days past, in this, the Capital of our Ally, Iran, 
and have shaped and confirmed our common 
policy. 

We express our determination that our nations 
shall work together in war and in the peace that 
will follow. 

As to war — our military staffs have joined 
in our round table discussions, and we have con- 
certed our plans for the destruction of the Ger- 
man forces. We have reached complete agree- 
ment as to the scope and timing of the operations 
to be undertaken from the east, west and south. 

The common understanding which we have here 
reached guarantees that victory will be ours. 

And as to peace — we are sure that our concord 
will win an enduring Peace. We recognize fully 
the supreme responsibility resting upon us and 
all the United Nations to make a peace which 
will command the goodwill of the overwhelming 
mass of the peoples of the world and banish the 
scourge and terror of war for many generations. 

With our Diplomatic advisors we have sur- 
veyed the problems of the future. We shall seek 

l ) ; 



103 

the cooperation and active participation of all na- 
tions, large and small, whose peoples in heart and 
mind are dedicated, as are our own peoples, to the 
elimination of tyranny and slavery, oppression 
and intolerance. We will welcome them, as they 
may choose to come, into a world family of Demo- 
cratic Nations. 

No power on earth can prevent our destroying 
the German armies by land, their U Boats by sea, 
and their war plants from the air. 

Our attack will be relentless and increasing. 

Emerging from these cordial conferences we 
look with confidence to the day when all peoples 
of the world may live free lives, untouched by 
tyranny, and according to their varying desires 
and their own consciences. 

We came here with hope and determination. 
We leave here, friends in fact, in spirit and in 
purpose. 

Eoosevelt, Churchill and Stalin. 

Signed at Tehran, December 1, 1943 

-*■ 

Declaration Regarding Iran 

The President of' the United States of America, 
the Premier of the U. S. S. R., and the Prime 
Minister of the United Kingdom, having consulted 
with each other and with the Prime Minister of 
Iran, desire to declare the mutual agreement of 
their three Governments regarding relations with 
Iran. 

The Governments of the United States of Amer- 
ica, the U. S. S. R. and the United Kingdom rec- 
ognize the assistance which Iran has given in the 
prosecution of the war against the common enemy, 



104 

particularly by facilitating the transportation of 
supplies from overseas to the Soviet Union. The 
three Governments realize that the war has caused 
special economic difficulties for Iran and they 
agreed that they will continue to make available 
to the Iran Government such economic assistance 
as may be possible, having regard to the heavy 
demands made upon them by their world-wide 
military operations and to the world-wide short- 
age of transport, raw ' materials and supplies for 
civilian consumption. 

With respect to the post-war period, the Gov- 
ernments of the United States of America, the 
U. S. S. R. and the United Kingdom are in accord 
with the Government of Iran that any economic 
problem confronting Iran at the close of hostili- 
ties should receive full consideration along with 
those ' of other members of the United Nations by 
conferences or international agencies, held or cre- 
ated, to deal with international economic matters. 

The Governments of the United States of Amer- 
ica, the U. S. S. R. and the United Kingdom are 
at one with the Government of Iran in their desire 
for the maintenance of the independence, sover- 
eignty and territorial integrity of Iran. They 
count upon the participation of Iran, together 
with all other peace-loving nations, in the estab- 
lishment of international peace, security and pros- 
perity after the war, in accordance with the prin- 
ciples of the Atlantic Charter, to which all four 
Governments have ' continued to subscribe. 



XIV. Suspension of Oil Shipments to Spain 

<The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. X, No. 240, January 29, 1944) 

The loadings of Spanish tankers with petroleum 
products for Spain have been suspended through 
action of the State Department, pending a recon- 
sideration of trade and general relations between 
Spain and the United States in the light of trends 
in Spanish policy. The Spanish Government has 
shown a certain reluctance to satisfy requests 
deemed both reasonable and important by the 
State Department and concerning which repre- 
sentations have continuously been addressed to the 
Spanish Government for some time past. Certain 
Italian warships and merchant vessels continue 
interned in Spanish ports; Spain continues to per- 
mit the export to Germany of certain vital war 
materials such as wolfram ; Axis agents are active 
both in continental Spain and in Spanish African 
territory as well as in Tangier; some portion of 
the Blue Division appears still involved in the war 
against one of our allies; and reports have been 
received indicating the conclusion of a financial 
arrangement between the Spanish Government 
and Germany designed to make available to Ger- 
many substantial peseta credits which Germany 
unquestionably expects to apply to augmenting 
espionage and sabotage in Spanish territory and 
to intensifying opposition to us in the peninsula. 

This action has been taken after consultation 
and agreement with the British Government. 

105 



XV. United States Relations With the Existing 



Statement by the Acting Secretary of State 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. X, No. 245, Mar. 4, 1944) 

The foreign policy of the United States since 
the beginning of the war has been governed pri- 
marily by considerations of support to the prose- 
cution of the war. That applies to our relations 
with any country. That is the single uppermost 
point in our policy and must remain so. 

Prior to February 25, the Argentine Govern- 
ment had been headed by General Ramirez. On 
January 26, 1944 his Government broke relations 
with the Axis and indicated that it proposed to 
go further in cooperating in the defense of the 
Western Hemisphere and the preservation of 
hemispheric security. 

Suddenly, on February 25, under well-known 
circumstances, General Ramirez abandoned the 
active conduct of affairs. This Government has 
reason to believe that groups not in sympathy with 
the declared Argentine policy of joining the de- 
fense of the hemisphere were active in this turn of 
affairs. 

The Department of State thereupon instructed 
Ambassador Armour to refrain from entering of- 
ficial relations with the new regime pending de- 
velopments. This is the present status of our re- 
lations with the existing Argentine regime. 

In all matters relating to the security and de- 
fense of the hemisphere, we must look to the sub- 

106 



107 

stance rather than the form. We are in a bitter 
war with a ruthless enemy whose plan has in- 
cluded conquest of the Western Hemisphere. To 
deal with such grave issues on a purely technical 
basis would be to close our eyes to the realities of 
the situation. 

The support, by important elements inimical to 
the United Nations war effort, of movements de- 
signed to limit action already taken could only 
be a matter of grave anxiety. 

The United States has at all times had close ties 
with Argentina and the Argentine people. It has 
consistently hoped, and continues to hope, that 
Argentina will take the steps necessary to bring 
her fully and completely into the realm of hemi- 
spheric solidarity, so that Argentina will play a 
part worthy of her great traditions in the world- 
wide struggle on which the lives of all of the 
American countries, including Argentina, now de- 
pend. The policies and types of action, present 
and future, which would effectuate this full co- 
operation are fully known in Argentina, as in the 
rest of the hemisphere. 



615960—45- 



XVI. United States Objectives in India and the 

Far East 

Statement by the President 

{The Department of State Bulletin, Vol X, No. 241, February 5, 1944) 

The American objectives in India or elsewhere 
in continental Asia are to expel and defeat the 
Japanese, in the closest collaboration with our 
British, Chinese, and other Allies in that theater. 

Our task in expelling the Japs from Burma, 
Malaya, Java, and other territory is military. 
We recognize that our British and Dutch broth- 
ers-in-arms are as determined to throw the Japs 
out of Malaya and the Dutch East Indies as we 
are determined to free the Philippines. We pro- 
pose to help each other on the roads and waters 
and above them, eastward to these places and be- 
yond to Tokyo. No matter what individual or 
individuals command in given areas, the purpose 
is the same. 

There will, of course, be plenty of problems 
when we get there. Their solution will be easier 
if we all employ our utmost resources of experi- 
ence, good-will, and good faith. Nobody in India 
or anywhere else in Asia will misunderstand the 
presence there of American armed forces if they 
will believe, as we do at home, that their job is 
to assure the defeat of Japan, without which 
there can be no opportunity for any of us to enjoy 
and expand the freedoms for which we fight. 

108 



XVII. Japanese Atrocities 

United States Protests and Representations to Japan 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. X, No. 241, February 5, 1944) 

Immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor 
the Department of State took up with Japan the 
matter of according proper treatment for Ameri- 
can nationals in Japanese hands. Although 
Japan is not a party to the Geneva Prisoners of 
War Convention the Department obtained from 
the Japanese Government a commitment to apply 
the provisions of that convention to American 
prisoners of war, and, so far as adaptable, to 
civilian internees held by Japan. Since the very 
beginning of the war, by repeated protests and 
representations through the protecting power, the 
Department has again and again called to the 
Japanese Government's attention failures on the 
part of Japanese authorities to live up to their 
Government's undertakings. 

Horrified at the accounts of repatriates who 
returned on the first exchange voyage of the 
Gripsholm, accounts with which the public is fa- 
miliar through the statements of Mr. Grew and 
other repatriates, the Department made these ac- 
counts the basis of a vigorous and comprehensive 
protest to the Japanese Government. 

The American people are familiar with the 
protest addressed to Japan following the Japa- 
nese Government's barbarous action in executing 
our aviators who fell into Japanese hands after 
General Doolittle's raid over Tokyo. In that pro- 

109 



110 

test the Department again called upon the Japa- 
nese Government to carry out its agreement to 
Observe the provisions of the convention and 
warned the Japanese Government in no uncertain 
terms that the American Government will hold 
personally and officially responsible for their acts 
of depravity and barbarity all officers of the Japa- 
nese Government who have participated in their 
commitment and, with the inexorable and inevi- 
table conclusion of the war, will visit upon such 
Japanese officers the punishment they deserve 
for their uncivilized and inhuman acts against 
American prisoners of war. 

When it received from the military authorities 
reports of the brutal atrocities and depraved 
cruelties inflicted by the Japanese upon Ameri- 
can prisoners of war in the Philippines the De- 
partment again called upon the Japanese Govern- 
ment to honor its undertaking to apply the pro- 
visions of the Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention and to observe in its treatment of Ameri- 
can nationals held by it the international common 
law of decency. 

These protests are but three of the many that 
have been sent by the Department to Japan. 

In order that the public may be familiar with 
the Department's efforts to obtain from Japan 
fulfilment of its undertakings to treat American 
nationals in its hands in accordance with humane 
and civilized principles, there is printed below a 
statement giving the dates of the principal repre- 
sentations and protests made by the Department, 
with a brief resume of their purpose. The latest 
of these, representations comprehensively citing 



Ill 

categories of abuse and of neglect to which Amer- 
ican prisoners in the hands of the Japanese have 
been subjected and calling for amelioration of the 
treatment accorded to American nationals, both 
prisoners of war and civilian internees, went for- 
ward on January 27. 

1942 

January 13. The exchange of names of prisoners 
of war in accordance with article 77, Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention, and of interned 
civilians in accordance with the same article 
when applied to the treatment of civilians, was 
proposed. 

January 31. Request that representatives of the 
Swiss Government entrusted with the protec- 
tion of American interests in Japan and Japa- 
nese-occupied territory be permitted to visit 
all camps where Americans are held, in ac- 
cordance with article 86, Geneva Prisoners of 
War Convention. Similar facilities requested 
for representatives of the International Red 
Cross Committee in accordance with interna- 
tional usage. 

February 3. Proposal to exchange names of civil- 
ian internees and prisoners of war repeated. 

February 7. Request for permission to visit camps 
repeated. 

February 13. Proposal that in application of 
clauses of Geneva Convention which relate to 
food and clothing, racial and national customs 
be taken into account. 

February 14. Japaneese Government informed 
that United States Government may have to 



112 

reconsider its policy of extending liberal treat- 
ment to Japanese if assurances are not given 
by the Japanese Government that liberal prin- 
ciples will be applied to Americans. Request 
that Swiss representative be permitted to visit 
part of Philippines occupied by the Japanese 
forces. 

March 3. Request that nurses and other sanitary 
personnel be repatriated in accordance with 
article 12 of the Geneva Red Cross Convention. 

March 11. Asked for immediate report of the 
names of American sick, wounded, and dead. 

March 19. Made proposals with regard to the 
labor of civilians, provision of food according 
to national tastes, visits . by friends, relatives, 
doctors, etc., visits by protecting power and in- 
ternational Red Cross to civilian internment 
camps. 

April 3. Asked for permission for the appoint- 
ment of an International Red Cross representa- 
tive for the Philippines. 

April 11. Request for improvement in treatment 
of civilians at Kobe. 

May 14. Confirmation requested of message re- 
ceived from International Red Cross that Japa- 
nese authorities are applying Geneva Red Cross 
Convention. 

May 14. Asked if Swiss representatives were per- 
mitted to interview prisoners of war without 
witnesses in accordance with article 86 of 
Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

May 19. Asked for information concerning 
whereabouts of Americans from Wake Island. 

May 19. Requested information concerning where- 
abouts of Americans in Philippine Islands. 



113 

May 20. Repeated request for lists of American 
wounded, sick, and dead. 

May 20. Requested improvement of conditions 
under which civilian internees were held. 

May 21. Requested visits to camps by Swiss rep- 
resentatives and application of Geneva Pris- 
oners of War Convention in outlying areas in 
accordance with Japanese Government's under- 
taking. 

June 4. Repeated request for permission for 
Swiss and International Red Cross representa- 
tives to visit camps. 

June 11. Repeated request for permission for 
Swiss representatives to interview prisoners of 
war without witnesses. 

June 19. Pressed for appointment of Interna- 
tional Red Cross delegate in the Philippines. 

July 14. Requested Japanese Government to re- 
port names of prisoners and internees held in 
Philippines and British and Netherlands ter- 
ritories under Japanese occupation in accord- 
ance with article 77, Geneva Prisoners of War 
Convention. 

July 15. Repatriation of seriously sick and 
wounded prisoners of war on the basis of the 
Model Agreement attached to the Geneva Pris- 
oners of War Convention proposed. 

July 17. Requested Swiss to endeavor to have 
conditions in Kobe civilian camps improved. 

August 7. Protest against the sentences imposed 
on Americans who attempted escape from 
Shanghai prisoner-of-war camp. These sen- 
tences were contrary to article 50, Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention. Protest was 
made at the same time against the refusal of 



114 

the Japanese authorities to permit the Swiss 
representatives to visit these men. 

August 12. Permission again requested for Swiss 
and International Red Cross representatives to 
visit all camps. 

August 27. Again requested that visits to camps 
be permitted. 

September 11. Additional request for the trans- 
mission of names of prisoners of war. Asked 
if prisoners might mail cards immediately after 
their arrival at camp in accordance with article 
36, Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

September 22. Lists of the camps, their location, 
and population requested. 

September 26. Japanese asked to accept mail ad- 
dressed to persons not reported as interned be- 
cause Japanese authorities had not properly 
reported names of persons held. 

■September 29. Requested ranks of officers who un- 
successfully attempted to escape be restored. 
Protection of Geneva Prisoners of War Conven- 
tion for American aviators reportedly being held 
incommunicado demanded. 

September 29. Requested reporting of names of 
400 American civilians known to have been on 
Wake Island and whose names have not yet 
been reported as prisoners or internees. 

October 6. Pressed for reply concerning proposals 
for repatriation of seriously sick and wounded. 

November 12. Pressed Japanese to provide at 
their expense medical care for internees in 
accordance with article 14, Geneva Prisoners of 
War Convention, when adapted to the treatment 
of civilian internees. . 



115 

November 17. Protest against six cases of atroci- 
ties perpetrated by Japanese authorities. 

November 17. Requested additional food at Negi- 
shi camp. 

November 17. Weekly transmission of names of 
American prisoners of war and civilian in- 
ternees requested in accordance with article 77^ 
Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

December 7. Names of captured aviators and per- 
mission to visit them requested. 

December 7. Requested that (1) internees at Su- 
mire be allowed to have visit or s, (2) visitors 
may speak languages other than Japanese, (3) 
Swiss representatives be allowed to speak to in- 
ternees without witnesses. 

December 12. Extended protest regarding torture, 
neglect, physical violence, solitary confinement, 
illegal prison sentences, mistreatment, and abuse 
that led to deaths of some Americans; failure 
to permit visits to camps by Swiss and Inter- 
national Red Cross representatives; and other 
violations of the Geneva Prisoners of .War Con- 
vention and the laws of humanity. 

December 17. Protest against Japanese decision 
to apply Geneva Convention only to extent that 
its provisions do not change the effect of Japa- 
nese laws in force. 

December 19. Protests against failure of Japanese ' 
to afford facilities to permit the receipt and 
distribution of relief supplies in accordance with 
article 37 of the Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention. 



116 

1943 

January 2. Requested that names of Americans 
held in an internment camp in Java be provided 
in accordance with article 77, Geneva Prisoners 
of War Convention, that Swiss representatives 
visit the camp in accordance with article 86, 
Geneva Prisoners of War Convention, and that 
International Red Cross representatives be per- 
mitted to visit the camp in accordance with gen- 
eral international usage. 

January 4. Protest concerning conditions at Shi- 
nigawa prisoner-of-war camp. Protest covers 
insufficient diet (article 11, Geneva Prisoner of 
War Convention) and request that Japanese 
grant Americans reciprocal treatment with re- 
spect to mail privileges and wages for labor. 

February 4. Requested a liberalization of maxi- 
mum canteen purchases permitted in any month 
be granted on the basis of reciprocity. 

February 5. Protest against Japanese failure to 
provide canteens in accordance with article 12, 
Geneva Prisoners of War Convention, failure 
to permit free exercise of religion in accordance 
with article 16, requirement that non-commis- 
sioned officers perform other than supervisory 
labor contrary to the provisions of article 27, 
limitation on correspondence with the protect- 
ing power contrary to article 44. Increased 
facilities with regard to mail requested on a 
basis of reciprocity. 

February 12. Protest against failure of Japanese 
to provide heat at Urawa camp in accordance 
with article 10, Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention. 



117 

February 15. Protest against Japanese refusal to 
permit Swiss representatives to interview in- 
ternees without witnesses in accordance with 
article 86, Geneva Prisoners of War Conven- 
tion. 

February. 16. Protest against the Japanese failure 
to provide proper medical attention to prisoners 
of war in accordance with article 14, Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention. 

February 18. Protest against program of general 
internment of American nationals in the Far 
East. 

February 20. Protest against refusal of Japanese 
authorities to permit American internees to re- 
ceive foodstuffs sent from the outside in accord- 
ance with article 37, Geneva Prisoners of War 
Convention. Japanese Government requested 
reciprocally to permit Americans to receive 
visitors. 

February 25. Request that Japanese supply the 
names of Americans held in the Sham-Sui-Po 
prisoner-of-war camp, Kowloon, in accordance 
with article 77, Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention. 

March 1. Further protest with regard to failure 
of Japanese authorities to permit interviews 
without witnesses being present. Request that 
the Japanese authorities reciprocally provide 
underwear for American internees. 

March 1. Protest against refusal of Japanese au- 
thorities in Thailand to aipply Geneva Prisoners 
of War Convention in accordance with Japa- 
nese Government's undertaking. 

March 6. Protest against refusal of Japanese Gov- 
ernment to permit representatives of protecting 



118 

power to visit and to communicate with Ameri- 
can civilian internees at Singapore in accord- 
ance with articles 44 and 86, Geneva Prisoners 
of War Convention. 

March 8. Request for permission for Swiss rep- 
resentatives to visit American prisoners of war 
in labor detachments. 

March 11. Japanese Government reminded that 
United States Government expects that Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention will be applied 
to the treatment of American prisoners held by 
the Japanese forces in Thailand. 

March 12. Japanese Government pressed to re- 
store military rank of American officers who, 
as a penalty for trying to escape, were deprived 
of their rank contrary to article 49, Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention. 

March 15. Additional protest against failure of 
Japanese authorities to transmit the names of 
prisoners of war and civilian internees in accord- 
ance with article 77, Geneva Prisoners of War 
Convention. 

March 16. Protest against refusal of Japanese 
authorities to install canteens where foodstuffs 
may be purchased in accordance with article 
12, Geneva Prisoners of War Convention, and 
to permit interviews between internees and 
Swiss delegate without witnesses. 

March 18. Protest against another instance when 
Japanese did not permit Swiss representative to 
interview internees without witnesses. 

March 26. Reciprocal treatment again requested 
with regard to mail forwarded by civilian in- 
ternees and prisoners of war. 



119 

March 30. Protest against failure of Japanese 
Government to report names of all American 
civilians who were taken into custody at Wake 
Island. 

April 3. Further protest against Japanese failure 
to provide clothing in accordance with article 
12, Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

April 8. Reciprocal treatment requested for in- 
terned persons to live together as family units. 

April 12. Protest against the Japanese action in 
sentencing to death American airmen for acts 
committed during military operations. Protest 
made at the same time against Japanese refusal 
to grant these men' the safeguards with respect 
to judicial proceedings set up in articles 60, 61, 
62, 65, and 66, Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention. 

May 22. Protest against refusal of the Japanese 
Government to permit representatives of the 
protecting power to act in behalf of American 
interests in Hong Kong. 

May 25. Protest against Japanese refusal to per- 
mit visits to camps near Shanghai by repre- 
sentatives of the Swiss Consulate General. 

May 25. Protest against continued Japanese re- 
fusal to permit conversations between prisoners 
of war and Swiss representatives without wit- 
nesses. 

May 25. Protest against refusal of Japanese Gov- 
ernment to permit advances of official United 
States Government funds to needy American 
nationals detained by Japan. 

May 25. Further protest with regard to the fail- 
ure of the Japanese Government to report 



120 

names of all civilians last known to have been 
on Wake Island. 

May 27. General protest against the Japanese 
failure to provide standards of housing, diet, 
clothing, medical care, etc., for Americans, that 
are in accordance with the Geneva Prisoners 
of War Convention. 

May 31. Request that Swiss visit civilians in- 
terned in Philippines and prisoners of war held 
at Mukden, Manchuria. 

June 5. Protest against failure of Japanese to 
permit visits by representatives of the protect- 
ing power to internment camps in and near 
Canton, Weihsien, and Wuhu, all in China. 

June 9. Protest against failure of Japanese Gov- 
ernment to permit Swiss to visit prisoner-of- 
war camp at Hakodate in accordance with ar- 
ticle 86, Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

July 3. Further protest with regard to failure of 
Japanese authorities to permit Swiss repre- 
sentatives to visit camps. 

July 6. Extended protest against the Japanese 
Government's refusal to permit Swiss repre- 
sentatives to visit all prisoner-of-war and civil- 
ian internment camps in Japan and Japanese- 
occupied territory. 

July 17. Protest against Japanese Government's 
action in locating camps in an unhealthy loca- 
tion, in failing to communicate orders to pris- 
oners of war in a language which they under- 
stand, in failing to permit the camp spokesmen 
to correspond with the protecting power, in 
failing to provide clothing, and in requiring ex- 
cessive hours of labor by prisoners of war. 



121 

These acts were contrary to articles 10, 20, 44, 
12, and 30, respectively, of the Geneva Prison- 
ers of War Convention. Reciprocal treatment 
with regard to mail again requested. 

July 20. Protest against failure of Japanese au- 
thorities to (1) supply adequate food, lodging, 
and clothing (2) to permit representatives of 
protecting power to interview internees without 
witnesses (3) establish canteens at civilian in- 
ternment camps. 

August 5. Protest against failure of Japanese 
Government to report names of Americans be- 
ing held in Burma as required by article 77 \ 
Geneva Prisoners of War Convention. 

October 7. Protest against failure of Japanese au- 
thorities to permit visits to prisoner-of-war 
camp at Fukuoka. 

October 13. Reciprocal treatment requested with 
respect to the privilege of dating letters and 
postcards mailed by prisoners of war and civil- 
ian internees. 

November 19. Additional protest with respect to 
the failure of the Japanese Government to re- 
port the names of American civilians interned 
at Wake Island. 

November '22. Protest against Japanese failure to 
permit the Swiss representatives to visit Amer- 
ican prisoners of war held by the Japanese in 
Thailand. 

December 1. Additional representations with re- 
spect to reciprocal privileges for prisoners of 
war and civilian internees to forward mail. 

December 2. Additional protest with respect to the 
failure of the Japanese Government to report 



122 

the names of all civilians held in internment 
camps as well as the release or transfer of per- 
sons previously reported in accordance with 
article 77 of the Geneva Prisoners of War Con- 
vention when it is adapted to the treatment of 
civilian internees. 
December 11. Protest against Japanese refusal 
to permit representatives of the protecting 
power to visit sick Americans held in hospital 
in Shanghai. 

1944 

January 27. Extended protest to Japanese Gov- 
ernment with respect to : 

(1) Failure to permit representatives of Swiss 
Government and of the International Red Cross 
Committee to visit all places where Americans 
are held 

(2) failure to forward complaints to the appro- 
priate authorities and to representatives of the 
protecting power 

(3) punishment of American nationals for com- 
plaining concerning the conditions of captivity 

(4) failure io furnish needed clothing to Ameri- 
can nationals 

(5) confiscation of personal effects from Ameri- 
can civilian internees and prisoners of war. 

(6) subjection of Americans to insults and to 
public curiosity 

(7) failure and refusal to provide health-sus- 
taining food 

(8) improper use of the profits of the sale of 
goods in camp canteens 



123 

(9) forcing civilians to perform labor other than 
that connected with the administration, main- 
tenance, and management of internment camps 

(10) forcing officer prisoners of war to perform 
labor and non-commissioned officers to do other 
than supervisory work 

(11) requiring prisoners of war to perform labor 
that has a direct relation with war operations 

(12) failure to provide proper medical care 

(13) failure to report the names of all prisoners 
of war and civilian internees in their hands and 
of American combatants found dead on the field 
of battle 

(14) failure to permit prisoners of war freely to 
exercise their religion 

(15) failure to post copies of Geneva Prisoners 
of War Convention in English translation in 
the camps 

(16) failure to provide adequate equipment and 
accommodations in the camps 

(17) failure to apply the provisions of the Geneva 
Prisoners of War Convention with respect to 
the trial and punishment of prisoners of war 

(18) inflicting corporal punishment and torture 
upon American nationals. 

January 27. Comprehensive statement detailing 
specific instances of failure of the Japanese 
Government to abide by its commitments as 
charged above. 



815900—45 



XVIII. Granting of Plenipotentiary Powers in 
the Field of Foreign Relations to Each of the 
Soviet Socialist Republics 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. X, No. 254, May 6, 1944) 

Under provisions of the law adopted by the 
Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics on February 1, 1944, each Soviet Re- 
public has the right to enter into direct relations 
with foreign states and to conclude agreements 
with them. 

A translation of the law and a translation of a 
circular note of February 11, 1944 from the Soviet 
Foreign Office concerning the reorganization of 
the People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs, 
with which the law was enclosed, were transmitted 
to the Department of State with a despatch of 
February 15, 1944 from the American Embassy at 
Moscow. 

The circular note reads in part as follows 
(translation) : 

"With a view to expanding international rela- 
tions and to strengthening the collaboration of the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with other 
states, and in view of the growing need of the 
Soviet Republics for establishing direct relations 
with foreign states, the new Law provides that 
each Soviet Republic has the right to enter into 
direct relations with foreign states, to conclude 
agreements with them and to exchange diplomatic 
and consular representatives. The Law of Feb- 
ruary 1, 1944, introduces appropriate amendments 

124 



125 

into the present Constitution of the Union of So- 
viet Socialist Republics of December 5, 1936." 
A translation of the text of the law follows: 

The Law for the Granting to the Union Re- 
publics of Plenipotentiary Powers in the 
Field of Foreign Relations and for the Cor- 
responding Reorganization of the People's 
Commissariat for Foreign Affairs From an 
All-Union to a Union-Republican People's 
Commissariat. 

With a view to extending international relations 
and to strengthening the collaboration of the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with other 
states and in view of the growing need of the 
Union Republics to establish direct relations with 
foreign states, the Supreme Soviet of the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics resolves: 

1. To provide that the Union Republics may 
enter into direct relations with foreign states and 
conclude agreements with them. 

2. To include in the Constitution of the U. S. 
S. R. the following amendments : 

(a). Add to Article 14 point "a" of the Con- 
stitution of the U. S. S. R. after the words "repre- 
sentation of the Union in international relations, 
conclusion and ratification of treaties" the words 
"the establishment of the general form of mutual 
relations of the Union Republics with foreign 
states" whereby this point will read as follows: 

"(a). Representation of the Union in international rela- 
tions, conclusion and ratification of treaties with other 
states, and the establishment of the general form of mu- 
tual relations of the Union Republics with foreign states." 



126 

(b). Add to the Constitution of the U. S. S. R. 
Article 18-a with the following content: 

"Article 18-a. Each Union Republic has the right to 
enter into direct relations with foreign states, to conclude 
agreements with them and to exchange diplomatic and con- 
sular representatives." 

(c). Add to Article 60 of the Constitution of 
the U. S. S. R. point "e" with the following con- 
tent: 

"(e). Establishes representation -of the Union Republic 
in international relations." 

3. To reorganize the People's Commissariat for 
Foreign Affairs from an All-Union to a Union- 
Republican People's Commissariat. 

President of the Presidium of the Supreme So- 
viet of the U. S. S. R., M. Kalinin. 

Secretary of the Presidium of the Supreme So- 
viet of the U. S. S. R. ? A. Gorkin. 

Moscow, Kremlin February 1, 1944. 



XIX. Sovereign Equality for All Nations 

Statement by the Secretary of State 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. X, No. 258, June 3, 1944) 

At his press and radio news conference on June 
1 the Secretary of State made the following reply 
in answer to a question whether there was any- 
thing he could say that might be of reassurance to 
the small nations. The correspondent who asked 
the question pointed out that some of the small 
nations seemed to think that they would not be 
properly represented in the proposed international 
organization : 

"That is a matter in which the small nations and the 
large nations as well should be at all times especially in- 
terested. It is a mutual affair. The future welfare of each 
nation depends upon the welfare of all. In view of that 
common interest and that self-interest in every mutual 
sense, I doubt whether there would be many nations, large 
or small, which would have any other purpose than to co- 
operate in all legitimate and practicable international re- 
lationships that would be mutually advantageous and mu- 
tually profitable. As far as this Government is concerned, 
whenever I have said anything on this subject, it has al- 
ways emphasized the all-inclusive nature of the world situ- 
ation and our disposition and purpose to see that all na- 
tions, especially the small nations, are kept on a position of 
equality with all others and that, in every practicable way, 
there will be cooperation. 

"Now, it is not possible at this stage for this Government 
or any government to give anybody a blueprint as to all of 
the details of how these relationships between all 'of the 
different nations will be gradually developed and perfected. 
There is no occasion to be especially concerned about 'the 

127 



128 

attitude of this Government in view of the declarations 
that the President, and I, and others have made. The truth 
is that even those declarations are not necessarily called for 
in the light of our entire history and our traditions. 'We 
have for 150 years preached liberty to all the nations of 
the earth, to all the peoples of the earth, and we have prac- 
ticed it. We have encouraged all nations to aspire to lib- 
erty, and to enjoy it. Our attitude toward the Philippines 
is a striking example. Nobody had to put us on the wit- 
ness stand to know what we were doing for them. 

"Even back in our earlier days we preached the same 
spirit of liberty with which we, ourselves, were inspired in 
acquiring our own liberty, to all the nations — especially 
those that were in chains of depotism, as the South Amer- 
ican countries were for centuries under Spanish rule. No- 
body asked us to do it. That was our philosophy. That 
was our spirit, both at home and toward all peoples who 
might ' aspire to liberty. As soon as our American neigh- 
bors threw off the Spanish yoke we proceeded to recognize 
them, right and left. We had the same spirit toward 
Greece and other countries desiring liberty as we demon- 
strated in the Philippines. That has been our consistent 
record, a record of championship of liberty for everybody, 
encouraging them at all times and in all places. I see no 
reason why this country, this great free people who through 
generations have dedicated themselves to this wonderful 
human cause and preserved it — I see no reason why they 
should be catechized every morning before breakfast as to 
their loyalty to liberty, or their consistent desire of liberty 
for everybody and freedom for aspiring peoples every- 
where." 



XX. Post-War Security Organization Program 

Statement by the President 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. 10, No. 260, June 17, 1944) 

The conference today with officials of the De- 
partment of State on the post-war security organi- 
zation program is a continuation of conferences 
which have been held from time to time during 
the past 18 months. These conferences have en- 
abled me to give personal attention to the develop- 
ment and progress of the post-w T ar work the 
Department of State is doing. 

All plans and suggestions from groups, organi- 
zations, and individuals have been carefully dis- 
cussed and considered. I wish to emphasize the 
entirely non-partisan nature of these consulta- 
tions. All aspects of the post-war program have 
been debated in a cooperative spirit. This is a 
tribute to the political leaders who realize that 
the national interest demands a national program 
now. Such teamwork has met the overwhelming 
approval of the American people. 

The maintenance of peace and security must be 
the joint task of all peace-loving nations. We 
have, therefore, sought to develop plans for an 
international organization comprising all such 
nations. The purpose of the organization would 
be to maintain peace and security and to assist the 
creation, through international cooperation, of 
conditions of stability and well-being necessary 
for peaceful and friendly relations among nations. 

Accordingly, it is our thought that the organi- 

129 



130 

zation would be a fully representative body with 
broad responsibilities for promoting and facili- 
tating international cooperation, through such 
agencies as may be found necessary, to consider 
and deal with the problems • of world relations. 
It is our further thought that the organization 
would provide for a council, elected annually by 
the fully representative body of all nations, which 
would include the four major nations and a suit- 
able number of other nations. The council would 
concern itself with peaceful settlement of inter- 
national disputes and with the prevention of 
threats to the peace or breaches of the peace. 

There would also be an international court of 
justice to deal primarily with justiciable disputes. 

We are not thinking of a superstate with its 
own police forces and other paraphernalia of 
coercive power. We are seeking effective agree- 
ment and arrangements through which the na- 
tions would maintain, according to their capaci- 
ties, adequate forces to meet the needs of pre- 
venting war and of making impossible deliberate 
preparation for war and to have such forces 
available for joint action when necessary. 

All this, of course, will become possible once 
our present enemies are defeated and effective 
arrangements are made to prevent them from 
making war again. 

Beyond that, the hope of a peaceful and ad- 
vancing world will rest upon the willingness and 
ability of the peace-loving nations, large and 
small, bearing responsibility commensurate with 
their individual capacities, to work together for 
the maintenance of peace and security. 



XXI. Severance of Diplomatic Relations With 

Finland 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. XI, No. 262, July 2, 1944) 

On June 30 the following note was delivered 
to Mr. Alexander Thesleff, Charge d 'Affaires of 
Finland : 

June 30, 1944. 
Sir: 

On June 27, 1944, the Finnish Government 
made the following announcement : 

"The German Foreign Minister von Bibbentrop has 
concluded his visit to the Finnish Government. 

"During this visit questions of interest to Finland and 
Germany were discussed, especially Finland's expressed 
desire with respect to military aid. The German Govern- 
ment has declared itself prepared to comply with this 
wish of the Finnish Government. 

"The discussions which were conducted between the 
President of the Finnish Republic Ryti and Foreign 
Minister Ramsay on one side and the German Foreign 
Minister on the other, are sustained by the spirit which 
has its roots in the comradeship in arms between the armies 
and the existing friendship between the two peoples. 

"Complete agreement and understanding were reached 
on all points between the Finnish Government and the 
German Government." 

The Finnish Government has thus formally ad- 
mitted to the world that it has now entered a hard 
and fast military partnership with Nazi Germany 
irrevocable throughout the war, for the purpose of 
fighting the Allies of the United States, in alliance 
with the enemies of the United States. This ac- 
tion was taken without recourse to the established 

131 



132 

democratic procedure of Finland, and responsi- 
bility for the consequences must rest solely on 
the Finnish Government. 

The American Government is not unaware of 
the fact that the infiltration of German troops into 
Finland, with the consent of the Finnish Govern- 
ment and German infiltration into the councils of 
the Finnish Government have deprived Finland of 
liberty of action and reduced the Government of 
the Republic of Finland to the condition of a 
puppet of Nazi Germany. 

This necessarily changes the status of the Fin- 
nish Government. The United States, up to the 
present, has taken every opportunity, publicly and 
through diplomatic representations, to warn the 
Finish Government of the inevitable consequences 
of continuing its association with Nazi Germany. 
These warnings have been ignored, and the part- 
nership is now complete. 

The Government of the United States must take 
into account the fact that at this decisive stage in 
the combined operations of the military, naval and 
air forces of the United States and the other 
United Nations, the Finnish operations have a 
direct bearing on the success of the Allied effort. 
Notwithstanding the esteem in which the Amer- 
ican people have held the people of Finland, fur- 
ther relations between the Government of the 
United States and the Government of Finland are 
now impossible. 

The American Charge d' Affaires in Helsinki 
has therefore been instructed to request passports 
for himself and for the members of his staff and 
their families. 



133 

The American Government is requesting the 
Swiss Government to assume immediately the 
representation of American interests in Finland, 

Accept [etc.] Cordell Hull 

The Charge dAif aires of Finland was handed 
his passport at 11 a. m. June 30 by Mr. George T. 
Summerlin, Special Assistant to the Secretary of 
State. 

Arrangements will be made as soon as possible, 
on a basis of reciprocity, for the repatriation of 
Mr. Thesleff, his family, and the members of the 
Legation staff. Meanwhile, they will be treated 
with all appropriate personal courtesies although 
necessarily their activities will be restricted. 



XXII. The United Nations Monetary and 
Financial Conference 

(The Department of State Bulletin, Vol. XI, No. 226, 
July 30, 1944) 

Summary of Agreements 

This Conference at Bretton Woods, represent- 
ing nearly all the peoples of the world, has consid- 
ered matters of international money and finance 
which are important for peace and prosperity. 
The Conference has agreed on the problems need- 
ing attention, the measures which should be taken, 
and the forms of international cooperation or or- 
ganization which are required. The agreement 
reached on these large and complex matters is 
without precedent in the history of international 
economic relations. 

I. The International Monetary Fund 

Since foreign trade affects the standard of life 
of every people, all countries have a vital interest 
in the system of exchange of national currencies 
and the regulations and conditions which govern 
its working. Because these monetary transactions 
are international exchanges, the nations must 
agree on the basic rules which govern the ex- 
changes if the system is to work smoothly. When 
they do not agree, and when single nations and 
small groups of nations attempt by special and 
different regulations of the foreign exchanges to 
gain trade advantages, the result in instability, a 
reduced volume of foreign trade, and damage to 

.134 



135 

national economies. This course of action is 
likely to lead to economic warfare and to endan- 
ger the world's peace. 

The Conference has therefore agreed that broad 
international action is necessary to maintain an 
international monetary system which will promote 
foreign trade. The nations should consult and 
agree on international monetary changes which 
affect each other. They should outlaw practices 
which are agreed to be harmful to world prosper- 
ity, and they should assist each other to overcome 
short-term exchange difficulties. 

The Conference has agreed that the nations here 
represented should establish for these purposes a 
permanent international body, The International 
Monetary Fund, with powers and resources ade- 
quate to perform the tasks assigned to it. Agree- 
ment has been reached concerning these powers 
and resources and the additional obligations which 
the member countries should undertake. Draft 
Articles of Agreement on these points have been 
prepared. 

II. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 

It is in the interest of all nations that post-war 
reconstruction should be rapid. Likewise, the de- 
velopment of the resources of particular regions is 
in the general economic interest. Programs of re- 
construction and development will speed economic 
progress everywhere, will aid political stability 
and foster peace. 

The Conference has agreed that expanded inter- 
national investment is essential to provide a por- 
tion of the capital necessary for reconstruction 
and development. 



136 

The Conference has further agreed that the na- 
tions should cooperate to increase the volume of 
foreign investment for these purposes, made 
through normal business channels. It is espe- 
cially important that the nations should cooperate 
to share the risks of such foreign investment, 
since the benefits are general. 

The Conference has agreed that the nations 
should establish a permanent international body 
to perform these functions, to be called The Inter- 
national Bank for Reconstruction and Develop- 
ment, It has been agreed that the Bank should 
assist in providing capital through normal chan- 
nels at reasonable rates of interest and for long 
periods for projects which will raise the produc- 
tivity of the borrowing country. There is agree- 
ment that the Bank should guarantee loans made 
by others and that through their subscriptions of 
capital all countries should share with the bor- 
rowing country in guaranteeing such loans. The 
Conference has agreed on the powers and re- 
sources which the Bank must have and on the ob- 
ligations which the member countries must as- 
sume, and has prepared draft Articles of Agree- 
ment accordingly. 

The Conference has recommended that in car- 
rying out the policies of the institutions here pro- 
posed special consideration should be given to the 
needs of countries which have suffered from 
enemy occupation and hostilities. 

The proposals formulated at the Conference for 
the establishment of the Fund and the Bank are 
now submitted, in accordance with the terms of 
the invitation, for consideration of the govern- 
ments and people of the countries represented. 



INDEX 

Page 
Africa, North, conference of President Roosevelt, Generalis- 
simo Chiang Kai-shek, and Prime Minister Churchill in 100 

Argentine, existing regime, U. S. relations with 106 

Atrocities, Japanese 109 

Austria, Declaration on 98 

Azores, Churchill statement on 87 

Belligerent right of visit and search 1 

Bretton Woods, United Nations Monetary and Financial Con- 
ference at ; 134 

Chiang Kai-shek, Generalissimo, conference in North Africa- 100 
China, agreement with, regarding jurisdiction over criminal 

offenses by armed forces 63 

Churchill, Prime Minister W. S. : 

Conference in North Africa 100 

Conference at Tehran 102 

Joint statement on Italy's declaration of war 92 

Statement on Azores 87 

Committee of National Liberation, French, recognition of 73 

Conference : 

of President Roosevelt, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, 

and Prime Minister Churchill in North Africa 100 

of President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill, and 

Premier Stalin at Tehran 102 

tripartite, in Moscow 95 

United Nations Monetary and Financial 134 

Defense areas 64 

Diversion, right of 18 

Equality, sovereign, for all nations 127 

Far East, U. S. objectives in 108 

Finland, severance of diplomatic relations with 131 

French Committee of National Liberation, recognition of 73 

India, U. S. objectives in 108 

Iran, declaration regarding 103 

Italy : 

Declaration regarding 97 

Statement by President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill 

and Premier Stalin on declaration of war by 92 

Japanese atrocities 109 

Monetary and Financial Conference of the United Nations 134 

Moscow, tripartite conference in 95 

137 



138 

Page 

Offenses, criminal, by armed forces, agreement with China 

concerning jurisdiction over 68 

Organization for post-war security, program 129 

Philippines, statement by President Roosevelt regarding pup- 
pet government in 93. 

Prizes : 

Destruction of 31 

Enemy • 31 

Neutral 38 

Recognition of the French Committee of National Liberation- 73 

Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, agreement of 

United Nations on . 75 

Roosevelt, President F. D. : 

Conference in North Africa 100 

Conference at Tehran . 102 

Joint statement on Italy's declaration of war 92 

Statement regarding puppet government in Philippines 93 

Security, general, declaration of four nations on 95 

Soviet Socialist Republics, granting of plenipotentiary powers 

in field of foreign relations to each 124 

Spain, suspension of oil shipments to 105 

Stalin, Premier Joseph : 

Conference at Tehran 102 

Joint statement concerning Italy's declaration of war 92 

Tehran, conference of President Roosevelt, Prime Minister 

Churchill, and Premier Stalin at 102 

United Nations: 

Monetary and financial conference 134 

Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, agreement on 75 

United States : 

Agreement with China concerning jurisdiction over crimi- 
nal offenses by armed forces 68 

Objectives in India and Far East 108 

Protests and Representations to Japan . 109 

Relations with existing regime in Argentina 106 

Severance of diplomatic relations with Finland 131 

Visit and search , 1 

War Zones 51 

o